Sean “Diddy” Combs trial jury resumes deliberations with another question for judge

With no verdict reached in Sean “Diddy” Combs’ federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial on the first day of deliberations, the jury of eight men and four women gathered again Tuesday to continue discussing the charges.

Judge Arun Subramanian began by addressing with the prosecution and defense a question posed Monday from the jury about one of the alleged racketeering acts — possession with intent to distribute drugs — which relates to the racketeering conspiracy charge Combs is facing. The jury sent a note asking for clarification on the part of the instructions addressing drug distribution.

Combs, 55, has pleaded not guilty to federal charges of racketeering conspiracy, two counts of sex trafficking, and two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution for allegedly arranging to fly sex workers across state lines. 

The first day of deliberations saw several notes from the jury, as well as Combs and his supporters bowing their heads in prayer in the courtroom. One of the notes came not long after jurors started deliberating and raised concerns from several jurors about another member of the panel. They told the judge they thought “he cannot follow your honor’s instructions.”

After a discussion between the judge, attorneys for Combs and prosecutors, the judge reminded the jurors of their obligation to follow the law and sent them back to resume their deliberations, but said if more issues should arise, the foreperson should send another note.

To help them come to a verdict, jurors were provided with a laptop loaded with all of the exhibits shown in court, including text messages, photographs and videos of the sexual encounters at the heart of the case.

Five alternate jurors are also on standby in case they’re needed to fill in on the main jury.

The jury will sift through seven weeks of at times graphic and emotional testimony about the rap, fashion and reality TV impresario’s propensity for violence and his sexual predilections, including drug-fueled sex marathons dubbed “freak-offs” or “hotel nights.” Defense lawyers argued that there was no conspiracy and that his conduct did not violate federal laws.

Alice Gainer

contributed to this report.