Sean Combs Defence Takes Derisive Aim At Accusers In Closing Argument

The music mogul’s accusers’ attorneys were out for money in closing arguments, and they rejected the idea that Sean “Diddy” Combs was the one who led a criminal ring on Friday, according to his attorney.

Attorney for the defense, Marc Agnifilo, scoffed at the depiction of a violent, domineering man who “used his employees, wealth, and power to foster a climate of fear” and obliterate women through sex parties that were demeaning and unlawful.

According to Agnifilo, Combs, 55, is a “self-made, successful Black entrepreneur” who had romantic relationships that were “complicated but ultimately consensual love stories.

Agnifilo’s meandering closing arguments were intended to confound the narrative that US attorney Christy Slavik had outlined one day earlier.

She had nearly five hours of meticulously walking the jury through the allegations, bringing together nearly seven weeks of testimony from 34 witnesses, as well as thousands of phone, financial, travel, and audiovisual records.

Combs led a criminal enterprise of “loyal lieutenants” and “foot soldiers” who “existed to serve his needs,” the prosecution claimed in explaining the most serious charge of racketeering.

The claim that senior employees, including his chief of staff and security personnel, were aware of and actively supported his actions is central to their case.

Agnifilo’s point was that neither of those accused of conspiring against Combs nor were they identified as conspirators in the indictment.

The defense attorney told the jury that “this is supposed to be simple.” “Maybe it’s because it’s not there,” you might find yourself in the weeds of this great complexity.

In his final statement, he said, “It takes a lot of courage to acquit.”

Combs could receive a possible life sentence if found guilty.

– Coercion or consent? –

Agnifilo spent a lot of time dissecting the testimony of Jane, a singer, and Casandra Ventura. In harrowing detail, both witnesses described Combs’ abuse and coercion.

Combs’ defense acknowledged in their opening statements that despite the artist’s relationship history, his outbursts did not constitute the kind of sex trafficking he is accused of.

The prosecution provided “crystal clear” evidence of trafficking that included coercion into drug-addled sex with paid escorts under the threat of reputational, physical, or financial harm, according to the prosecution.

The defense countered that the women were adult consenters making their own decisions and occasionally even mocking their terrifying witness accounts.

According to Agnifilo, “Cassie would be the one who would win this entire thing,” he said in Ventura’s civil lawsuit against Combs, in which case she received $ 20 million.

Ventura described brutal physical abuse, emotional manipulation, and fear Combs would end her career or reputation if she left him while speaking through tears on the witness.

Agnifilo acknowledged that the video was “terrible” and “very much domestic violence,” but insisted that it wasn’t “sex trafficking.”

The women involved were “drugged, covered in oil, sore, and exhausted,” according to the prosecution’s statement to jurors.

Ventura and Jane’s testimony about being coerced into having sex with male escorts, which were both refuted by Agnifilo in light of prostitution-related charges.

“This was a way of life.” All it is is, according to Agnifilo, “you want to call it swingers, you want to call it threesomes.”

Agnifilo said that was just Combs’ party boy lifestyle when he referred to the drug distribution accusations, which are one of the eight possible acts that could lead to a racketeering conviction.

The attorney claimed that “they seem to be doing what people in creative fields do.”

Jurors were shown a large number of phone records throughout the trial, including those that included messages from both women to show their affection and desire, but prosecutor Slavik argued that interpreting those words literally and in their entirety doesn’t provide a complete picture.

Slavik made numerous references to a forensic psychologist’s testimony, explaining how victims become victims of their abusers.

The final item in the proceedings that jurors will hear before the weekend is when the government has the final word: prosecutor Maurene Comey will refute Agnifilo’s argument.

Source: Channels TV