Recommendations of the Editorial team
After a seven -week process, Sean Combs was found guilty in two of the five charges raised against him, but in a stroke of luck for the competitive Mogul, he was acquitted in the most serious charges. Diddy still threaten up to 20 years in prison.
The mixed judgment found Combs guilty in two charges of promotion for prostitution in connection with his ex-girlfriend Casandra “Cassie” Ventura and an ex-girlfriend who testified under the name “Jane”. However, he was acquitted from the more serious charges of organized crime and sex trade.
If he had been found guilty in all charges or even in some of the more serious, Diddy should have expected lifelong imprisonment in prison. The debt of the two prostitution allegations could still bring him to prison for some time, but one calculates with a much milder punishment.
Each violation is punished at up to ten years in prison. Technically speaking, Diddy threatens a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. However, most legal experts do not assume that judge Arun Subramanian will impose such a tough punishment. Combs is not a criminal record, which could lead to a milder punishment. Subramanian could also allow him to serve the penalties for the two charges at the same time. An appointment for the verdict against Combs has not yet been determined.
Does Sean Combs stay in prison until the verdict was prison?
The question is currently more urgent whether Combs will remain in custody until the verdict is pronounced or will be released for the deposit. After the verdict was pronounced, the public prosecutor’s office and defense argued about this question, with Subramanian likely to make a decision today.
The public prosecutor said that Combs could “disregard the orders of this court in the event of a release”. She referred to evidence that the Mogul “continued to commit a number of crimes” – including alleged abuse and drug use. He knew that the federal government was going against him. Combs’ lawyer Marc Agnifilo, however, pushed for the immediate release of his client against the deposit and explained that this would be “nothing less than a fool” if he violated a judicial order.