Lt Pidgeon
Neo Member
I can't believe that no-one has used the "Diddy Oil" joke yet.
The Sean 'Diddy' Combs Trial: Unraveling the Curious Case of Baby Oil
GulfCoastZilla
Member
Kid Cudi talking about how Puff fire bombed his car, this happened after Diddy told Cassie he was going to blow up Cudi's car.
Last edited:
near
Gold Member
He broke into his house and messed with his dog too. Wild.
I'm actually surprised Cudi took the stand.
Jinzo Prime
Gold Member
Me too. Rap culture has a strong taboo on snitching.
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
He doesn't really have a choice. He could lie or say he doesn't know/doesn't recognize stuff/whatever but not like he can just refuse a subpoena.
TDiddyLive
Member
I'm not paying attention to the trial outside of here and random social media posts, but I'm not really seeing any solid evidence against him regarding the charges he is actually facing (from OP: Sean 'Diddy' Combs faces one count of racketeering conspiracy, two counts of sex trafficking by force, and two counts of transporting for prostitution – all felonies.)
And a lot of the accusations of criminal behavior he's not being charged with, like the firebombed car, is getting a lot of testimony that's basically saying a car a damaged and I believe it was him.
I'm not saying he is innocent of anything, but is there any actual evidence supporting the actual charges or is this trial just being used to shame him? Or is he actually being charged with additional offenses and it just hasn't been mentioned?
And a lot of the accusations of criminal behavior he's not being charged with, like the firebombed car, is getting a lot of testimony that's basically saying a car a damaged and I believe it was him.
I'm not saying he is innocent of anything, but is there any actual evidence supporting the actual charges or is this trial just being used to shame him? Or is he actually being charged with additional offenses and it just hasn't been mentioned?
Plies
Banned
Last edited:
Giallo Corsa
Member
TheUnicornGuy
Gold Member
Fitting that it has a cock in it...
TDiddyLive
Member
I fully knew this layup was coming, but how about an answer?
reinking
Gold Member
Racketeering conspiracy, also known as RICO conspiracy, involves a criminal agreement to engage in multiple unlawful activities as part of a criminal enterprise.
The firebombed car would be part of the charges related to establishing the racketeering conspiracy. This also helps establish a pattern of his behavior and demonstrates how he exerts control over others.
Last edited:
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Corroborated witness testimony is "evidence"; in fact, it along with confessions are what get most people convicted of any crime. Something like DNA evidence, or videos, or anything like that are only ever present in a small percentage of trials.
Last edited:
Poppinfresh
Member
I didn't know that RICO was the one charge they were still discussing.
When I heard they had reached a verdict on all but one charge I figured they had decided on "Not Guilty" on all but the least serious charge (similar to Karen Read) but knowing they are still discussing RICO makes me think that they have probably decided "guilty" on a couple of the more serious charges.
TDiddyLive
Member
I already got my answer to this. I know witness testimony is evidence. The question was if any of the "evidence" was actually toward what they charged him with. Lots of testimony about him being a piece of shit and guilty of state level crimes (that aren't being charged here). Now to see if the jury feels those apply to the federal charges he is actually being tried for.
StreetsofBeige
Member
I didnt know what RICO was. Had to google it now.
For those of you who dont know, when you hear about Diddy and RICO, it has to do with charge #1 Racketeering.
Racketeering - Wikipedia
On October 15, 1970, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961–1968), commonly referred to as the "RICO Act", became United States law. The RICO Act allows federal law enforcement to charge a person or group of people with racketeering, defined as committing multiple violations of certain varieties within a ten-year period. The purpose of the RICO Act was stated as "the elimination of the infiltration of organized crime and racketeering into legitimate organizations operating in interstate commerce". S.Rep. No. 617, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. 76 (1968). However, the statute is sufficiently broad to encompass illegal activities relating to any enterprise affecting interstate or foreign commerce.
Last edited:
Reizo Ryuu
Member
StreetsofBeige
Member
Recap from CNN. Looks like Diddy guilty on the two lesser charges. Who knows what will happen, but probably slap on the wrist going by what TV channels are assuming. None of them think he'll do big time at all.
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
Most of the jury was in the 48-70+ age range. I don't know if that has anything to do with the not guilty verdicts. But ... It's certainly a "show" on the news right now.
ShadyAcshuns
Member
And celebrity. They live by different rules than the rest of us. What a shame...
Artoris
Gold Member
that is just not true this kind of thing has destroyed a lot of celebrities
AREYOUOKAY?
Member
Hari Seldon
Member
Its all about the Benjamin's.
Cyberpunkd
Member
Netflix series when?
Connificent
Al Pachinko, Konami President
ClanOfNone
Member
The good old "rules for thee, but not for me" Big money celebrity justice.
Poppinfresh
Member
I mean, they should...
He was found not guilty of sex trafficking, which means that the jury didn't think he forced the women to prostitute themselves.
Miyazaki’s Slave
Gold Member
He is busy training to star as Balrog right now in the SF movie....but I could see him pull double duty as Hakan..."IT'S TIME TO OIL UP"
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
I'm confused why you don't think the testimony had anything to do with the sex trafficking charges. I think people fundamentally misunderstand those laws.
Wasn't enough for this jury though lol
Last edited:
Lunarorbit
Member
Fuck sean combs that little bitch. He got off so easy. Hope he gets the Tupac treatment soon
Aside from the racketeering charge, it was pretty much a case on whether there was ultimately consent or not. There was pretty much no way around the transportation charges due to the overwhelming evidence and receipts, so that was a gimme for the prosecutors. Pretty easy to hit since hiring/engagement for explicit sexual services with escorts/prostitutes is illegal in the majority of places in the US, regardless if it is a thriving and lucrative market.
The sex trafficking charges were the primary ones regarding consent. In the end, the jury determined (based on the evidence/testimonials on both sides) they had enough information to conclude they weren't forced or pushed to do it (I'm sure there was some nuances/grey areas). You can probably assume based on the 'not guilty' verdict they likely thought the two people likely consented given what they have seen/heard during the trial.
I'm neutral on this since it's one of those cases where only the people involved truly know what happened (Pretty much any case like this). In court, it's ultimately a he said vs she said. Whether you agree with the decision or not, we practically have no idea what really happened behind the scenes. To me, it seems like mostly private shit they do (including the involvement of escorts) in their own time. Based on the testimonials though (including other antics in his life that we have seen), he is probably a shitty/abusive boyfriend though - but the women knew what they were doing and consenting to.
Get ready to see an influx of sensational articles/Netflix specials/social media hot takes (including the Court of Public Opinion) on both sides. From "If the Justice system doesn't favor women in cases like this, it's a failure for everyone"/"No one believes women" to "P Diddy was the true victim in the end"/"This is a rare win for men in the Justice system" or some shit like that.
Diddy's lawyer has now successfully defended two high profiles RICO cases I believe? He's on his way to (if not already) being the Johnnie Cochran of this generation.
Usually in these cases, they won't really care in that sense or they see it all in the same charge. It's why you have separate charges:
1) Human Trafficking -> Was it consent for the two women? Consent = Not trafficked | No Consent = Trafficked
2) Transportation/Engagement of Prostitution -> Offering to buy/solicit services, which is illegal in the US. Usually the sex workers themselves (mostly) won't be charged for supplying services, they typically go for the people that buy/arrange for such services.
The sex trafficking charges were the primary ones regarding consent. In the end, the jury determined (based on the evidence/testimonials on both sides) they had enough information to conclude they weren't forced or pushed to do it (I'm sure there was some nuances/grey areas). You can probably assume based on the 'not guilty' verdict they likely thought the two people likely consented given what they have seen/heard during the trial.
I'm neutral on this since it's one of those cases where only the people involved truly know what happened (Pretty much any case like this). In court, it's ultimately a he said vs she said. Whether you agree with the decision or not, we practically have no idea what really happened behind the scenes. To me, it seems like mostly private shit they do (including the involvement of escorts) in their own time. Based on the testimonials though (including other antics in his life that we have seen), he is probably a shitty/abusive boyfriend though - but the women knew what they were doing and consenting to.
Get ready to see an influx of sensational articles/Netflix specials/social media hot takes (including the Court of Public Opinion) on both sides. From "If the Justice system doesn't favor women in cases like this, it's a failure for everyone"/"No one believes women" to "P Diddy was the true victim in the end"/"This is a rare win for men in the Justice system" or some shit like that.
Diddy's lawyer has now successfully defended two high profiles RICO cases I believe? He's on his way to (if not already) being the Johnnie Cochran of this generation.
Usually in these cases, they won't really care in that sense or they see it all in the same charge. It's why you have separate charges:
1) Human Trafficking -> Was it consent for the two women? Consent = Not trafficked | No Consent = Trafficked
2) Transportation/Engagement of Prostitution -> Offering to buy/solicit services, which is illegal in the US. Usually the sex workers themselves (mostly) won't be charged for supplying services, they typically go for the people that buy/arrange for such services.
Last edited:
Soltype
Member
I don't think he's saying testimony doesn't matter but that it's hard to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt based on testimony alone.
Donald mac Ronald
Member
No chance he sees a jail cell.
When do the rich and powerful ever do? R Kelly they had no choice, there were 100s of victims and witnesses.
When do the rich and powerful ever do? R Kelly they had no choice, there were 100s of victims and witnesses.
near
Gold Member
I think he will be sentenced for at least a couple years, maybe up to 5. I doubt they'll slap him with the max of 10 years.
Edit: It's 20 not 10 years right?
Last edited: