Judge Rules Against Diddy Trial Delay

SOURCE: usatoday.com

The federal government’s sex-crimes case against Sean “Diddy” Combs will soon be underway, underscoring an urgent push to hold one of the music industry’s most prominent figures accountable.

U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian ruled Friday against Combs’ defense team’s request to push back the start of his federal trial. At a roughly two-hour hearing April 18, Combs was seen smiling and waving to a few people as he exited the courtroom, including his mother, after a more emotionally subdued hearing than a previous one in March.

The decision means Combs will go to trial May 5 in a high-profile case intertwining celebrity and power under the spotlight of federal sex-crimes and trafficking charges. The indictment against the music mogul emerged alongside dozens of separate civil suits suggesting a pattern of abusive behavior and exploitation spanning decades, including accusations of rape, sexual assault and physical violence.

The embattled music mogul, 55, was arrested in September and has been charged with racketeering, sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution. He has pleaded not guilty to all five counts.

The federal government is advancing ahead to rein in the music industry, which has faced criticism for enabling troublesome behavior behind the scenes.

Subramanian ruled against the defense’s motion to delay the date of Combs’ trial two months after its scheduled May 5 start date.

Combs’ attorneys made the original request in a motion filed April 16 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, according to court documents obtained by USA TODAY. The ruling comes as Combs now faces two new charges of sex trafficking and transportation to engage in prostitution of the unnamed “Victim-2” filed earlier this month. –Patrick Ryan

Subramanian told the court there is no reason to think that the defense does not have sufficient time to put a defense together, roughly a month away from the May 5 start date. 

When Combs walked into the courtroom, he wasn’t smiling but hugged every member of his legal team. Throughout the court hearing, Combs solemnly looked around the room multiple times. In some moments, he nodded along with his defense team, and at other times passed notes to his attorneys. –Patrick Ryan 

The judge granted alleged Victims 2, 3 and 4, as they are named in the indictment, the right to use a pseudonym throughout the trial, explaining that it is common practice with sexual violence and trafficking cases.

Subramanian noted the importance of treating alleged victims with dignity and privacy and said there is “no clear reason” why names, addresses and places of employment should be made public. –Patrick Ryan

The defense pushed back about the use of pseudonyms, saying that the anonymous alleged victims have already been out in public and given interviews about Combs. The prosecution argued, however, that just because victims have given interviews doesn’t mean they included all of the explosive details of what allegedly happened and thus didn’t waive their right to anonymity. –Patrick Ryan

Prosecutors expressed concern about potential jurors disclosing their own experiences with sexual assault or violence in written questionnaires, arguing that potential jurors might be afraid of where the paper surveys would go and who might be reading their responses. They attorneys said questions about potential jurors’ experiences should only be disclosed in person via interviews with the attorneys. The defense argued jurors might be afraid to discuss their experiences aloud and pushed for the written disclosure.

Both sides reached a compromise: Questionnaires will include a box that allows potential jurors to choose whether they would prefer to speak about their experiences verbally or in writing. –Patrick Ryan

Over an hour of back and forth between sides took place about potentially excluding testimony from clinical and forensic psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes.

The prosecution argued that Hughes would be a blind expert, who would be brought in with no details about the case, and testify to fragmented memory, processing trauma and coping strategies. Prosecutors argued that Hughes could provide “relevant and helpful” context about subjects that potential jurors may not be familiar with, including “coercive control,” speaking to how perpetrators exert power over alleged victims and why those alleged victims may continue to participate in sexual activity with their abusers as an act of self-preservation.

However, the defense argued that Hughes has never spoken to any of the alleged victims and thus doesn’t know the specifics of their experiences. Hughes’ presented testimony is “cloaked in all this jargon and a patina of science” and her testimony is “useless and meaningless,” the defense said, arguing that it would confuse the jurors or potentially push them to make inferences about the victims that might not have factual merit to the case.

Subramanian said he would consider the arguments and rule later, but that only portions of Hughes’ testimony would likely be allowed and without using the phrase “coercive control,” with Hughes describing that concept with different wording. –Patrick Ryan 

Brian Steel, who represented rapper Young Thug in his own long-running legal battle and RICO trial, appeared at the federal court building as he joins Combs’ legal team ahead of the trial. –Anika Reed