And now it went very quickly: Yesterday morning German time it was said that the jury jury should withdraw and advise again, a few hours later they had made their judgment about Sean Combs aka puff daddy p. Diddy aka brother love at the New York court. Guilty twice, three times innocent. And with this one of the largest court hearings in pop-cultural presence approaches its preliminary end: not with an acquittal, but still with the reason to be happy for the 55-year-old. Why? He was acquitted in the three most serious charges.
Recommendations of the editorial team
The jury saw him innocent in the points:
- “Sex Trafficking” by Cassie Ventura, i.e. transport and coercion for sexual acts
- “Sex Trafficking” of the anonymous victim “Jane”
- Formation of a criminal association
He was clearly guilty in the two less difficult charges, transportation to participate in prostitution in cases related to Cassie and “Jane”. These two charges could be clearly demonstrated: Diddy has organized or organized the trip for the prostitutes with which Cassie and “Jane” should have sex during the “freak offs”. For this, he could still hike to prison for up to 20 years if the judge stuck the exact sentence, since each of these cases could be punished with a maximum of 10 years in prison.
Diddy’s reaction
Could – but that doesn’t have to happen. However, if Combs had not been acquitted by the jury in the other three charges, he would have been almost certain that he would have been as good as certain. The former music mogul also knows that and therefore thanked the jury for the acquittals, according to observers, applauded. His family and supporters are also said to have broken out into jubilation, his lawyer Marc Agnifilo said, according to the New York Times, that Combs had “returned his life by the jury”.
Still in the prison cell
However, Combs is still not free, the fans who persevere in front of the courthouse with “Free Puff” shirts still have to be patient: judge Arun Subramanian ordered him back to his prison cell in Brookly. It is still unclear when this should be spoken. Diddy’s lawyers had previously asked the court to leave him free so that he could spend the time with his family. However, Cassie Ventura’s lawyers contested this because they see his release as a danger to the victims who testified in the process.
The civil lawsuits
There are also potential civil lawsuits: a law firm in Texas claims to represent over 100 women and men who want to act against Combs, another anonymous woman strives for a procedure due to group rape. All of the publicity is said to be the defense.
How did these acquisitions come about?
In the United States, a jury jury, i.e. twelve legal laypersons, normal citizens who represent a cross -section of the community of the respective location must agree on a guilty verdict. And that was not the case with the rather complicated accusation of the formation of a criminal association, which was considered a risk in the run -up to observers that the public prosecutor was taken. In the term “criminal association” one thinks of organized crime, mafia structures, perhaps of terrorist groups – but not very, very, very rich people who can force their employees to do things that are legally taking place in the gray area or beyond.
And also the allegation of “sex traffic”, i.e. human trade and coercion was not as clear as “Metoo” cases are often unemployed. The statements of Cassie and “Jane” were dismaying – but they have just searched Diddy’s closeness, as a partner, as a potential sponsor. They also wrote to him messages in which they claimed that the “Freak Offs”, “Hotel Nights”, “Wild King Nights”, or whatever these orgies were called to have enjoyed, perhaps because sometimes they really found it good – or because they wanted to please their partner.
This focused on Combs’ defense during the eight -week negotiation and in a very sarcastic final plea: Yes, he was violent towards his partners, and yes, his sexual preferences were unconventionally – but what happened in the hotel rooms was mutually elongated and kinks were not criminal.
In the heart of the debate about “Metoo”
This would be right in the heart of the debate about “Metoo”: What is consent if power is unevenly distributed in a relationship? What is consent to drugs? What is consent when violence and the fear of experiencing violence play a role? And where does the boundary between unusual kink and exploitation and violence run?
This will continue to be debated – organizations that are committed to sexualized violence have immediately spoken out against this judgment. And the social media debate is already running hot, with comments between “Free Puff” and “Cassie is a liar” to complete horror, such as Diddy has been acquitted.
The judgment will probably hardly contain all the conspiracy counts that went viral in the run -up to Tikok, Instagram and other media. Influencers who claim that Beyoncé, Jay-Z, Ashton Kutcher, Justin Bieber or quite absurd people such as designer Rick Owens and his partner, in Diddy’s sex parties are said to have been involved in one way or another, will probably be very little to be broken down by legal atmosphere. It would be important now that it would be as complicated as the mutuality or after the power structures that create fabulously rich people around them socially. But you will probably never go as viral as a video with wild claims to Beyoncé.
In any case, the last word about the causa diddy has not yet been spoken – not because 50 cents are still long in coming. But the jury’s decision already feels like a preliminary victory for Combs.