Guest post by Vanessa Johannes

by VanessaJohannes

Though not in our District, surely by now everyone has heard about the indictment against “Diddy” or “Puff Daddy,” that is, rap mogul and business entrepreneur, Sean Combs.  The SDNY case charges Combs with three counts – RICO, Sex Trafficking, and Transporting to Engage in Prosecution.  Why is this case important – aside from the fact that a mega superstar has been charged with sex trafficking?  Because RICO does not typically accompany a sex trafficking case.  That unusual and unique charging model came from the R. Kelly prosecution.  And because “Johns,” or the men soliciting sexual services, typically do not get charged with crimes – certain not rich “Johns” who run million-dollar companies with seemingly legitimate businesses purposes and operations.  Here, the indictment charges Combs’ businesses as a conduit, or the enterprise, for pervasive and disturbing conduct towards women, stating that one of the purposes of his business was “ [f]ulfilling the personal desires of COMBS, particularly those related to COMBS' sexual gratification, including through the exploitation of women and the use of commercial sex workers.”  In many ways, the charges seem to indicate that Combs’ businesses were focused on “Freak Offs,” alleged “elaborate and produced sexual performances,” instead of producing the music and soundtracks of our 90’s youth.  The indictment is also unusual in its level of detail – indicating that the government may have extensive digital evidence and witness testimony secured.  Based on these details, earlier this week, U.S. Magistrate Judge Robyn Tarnofsky denied bond to Combs, whose lawyers offered a bail package of $50 million.   Judge Tarnofsky said she has "very significant concerns" about Combs' substance abuse and "what appears to be anger issues.”  Yesterday, Combs appeared before District Court Judge Andrew Carter Jr. on the appeal of bond.  Despite home confinement with private security monitoring him, Judge Carter denied the appeal, stating that Combs posed a risk of witness tampering and was a danger to the safety of the community.  Key to the Judge’s decision was Combs’ ability to “intimidate” witnesses unless confined - a hurdle for his defense team as they prepare for a complex trial. Certainly, there’s more to come our way on what is surely to be a case of the century.

The indictment can be found here: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25147299-combs-indictment-24-cr-542