NEW YORK (AP) — Two days of closing arguments in Sean “Diddy” Combs ’ sex trafficking trial began on Thursday with a prosecutor telling the jury the hip-hop mogul used “power, violence and fear” to rule a criminal enterprise that facilitated kidnapping, arson and brutal sex crimes that she said were at the heart of the case.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Christy Slavik provided the jury with a road map for a closing argument expected to last several hours.
She described Combs as someone “who doesn’t take no for an answer,” while he committed crimes of sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy for two decades.
Combs “counted on silence and shame” to enable and prolong his abuse, Slavik said. He used a “small army” of employees — an inner circle that included personal assistants and bodyguards — to harm women and cover it up, she said.
The theory of racketeering law is that “when someone commits crime as part of a group, they’re more powerful and dangerous,” Slavik said. “The defendant was a powerful man, but he became more powerful and dangerous because of his inner circle, his businesses — the enterprise.”
Prosecutors say Combs coerced and abused women for years as he used his “power and prestige” as a music star to enlist a network of associates and employees to help him while he silenced victims through blackmail and violence, including kidnapping, arson and physical beatings.
They say the Bad Boy Records founder induced female victims into drugged-up, elaborately produced sexual performances with male sex workers in events dubbed “Freak Offs.”
Defense lawyers have argued that Combs was involved in domestic violence but committed no federal crimes.
They built their case for acquittal through lengthy cross-examinations of most of the government’s 34 witnesses. Some witnesses testified only in response to subpoenas and made it clear to the jury that they didn’t want to be there.
Before Slavik began her closing, Judge Arun Subramanian told the jury they would hear a closing argument from a defense lawyer on Friday and a rebuttal by a prosecutor before he instructs them on the law and allows them to begin deliberating as early as late afternoon.
