Jury deliberations are underway as Sean “Diddy” Combs‘ widely reported federal trial draws to a close. The 32nd and 33rd days of the trial saw the court shift its attention from testimony and legal arguments to the jury’s sincere deliberations, as they now hold the defendant’s future in their hands. The jurors will have to sort through a mountain of evidence and five criminal counts following weeks of testimony.
Day 32: Jury Instructions and Opening Remarks
U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian began day 32 by reading in-depth legal explanations to each of the 12 jurors, making sure they understood the five criminal counts and their foundation in law. The actual charges, or “charging the jury,” lasted more than two hours. Jurors were paying close attention, marking paragraphs and taking notes, especially on significant legal thresholds like “reasonable doubt” and assessing witness credibility. By lunchtime, jury deliberations had officially begun, with Juror No. 5 as foreman.
One hour later, the jury delivered a note to the judge stating that they were worried that Juror No. 3 was refusing to follow instructions. Judge Subramania answered with a reminder to all of the jurors of an obligation to deliberate in good faith. Two additional notes were received later in the afternoon from the jury: one questioning the drug distribution count that had been presented by the government, and another stating they would recess for the day at 5 p.m. The jury seemed to be attentive and diligent workers throughout the day, and their initial set of notes revealed that they were struggling to separate pertinent facts of the racketeering count.
Day 33: Legal Disputes and Requests for Transcripts
Day 33 began with the fifth note from the jury, in which they asked for transcripts of the testimony of Cassie Ventura and Daniel Phillip. They wanted to see Ventura’s description of the alleged March 2016 attack at the InterContinental Hotel, what had happened at the Cannes Film Festival, and the weekly party nights that were also referred to as “freak offs.” They also wanted to see Phillip’s description of a similar incident at the Essex hotel.
This request initiated a protracted court fight between the prosecution and defense regarding what portions of Ventura’s and Phillip’s testimonies were proper to read. Prosecutors assented that they would give excerpts but opposed going too far. The defense contended for including pre-assault text messages between Ventura and Combs, while maintaining that giving Ventura’s entire 800-page testimony would be excessive.
Judge Subramanian eventually acquiesced to a compromise, agreeing to provide selected testimony regarding texts both before and after the hotel encounter and an Instagram post Ventura made following the release of surveillance video relating to the assault.
Earlier in the day, there was a separate argument over how to respond to a jury query about the definition of drug distribution. Though Combs is not charged directly with distribution, it is still included as part of the broader racketeering conspiracy charge. The judge ruled in favor of the government’s interpretation, noting that distribution could be as little as passing on a substance.
Combs, however, was in court and appeared upset as the hearing went on. He conferred with family members when the court recessed, and he sat silently with his attorneys during the morning.
Looking Ahead
While jury deliberations grew more intense and demands for transcripts of testimony mounted, the jury seemed to be searching through the facts and testimonies that had driven the trial. While the panel strives to achieve a unanimous verdict on every count, the next several steps will pen the final page of a highly followed legal fight. It is yet to be known whether the jury will deliver a verdict or request further clarification in the coming days, but until then, jury deliberations now take top billing in a trial that has already surpassed a month in duration.
