Federal prosecutors pushed back hard against Diddy’s acquittal request, calling the evidence against the rapper “overwhelming.”
Sean “Diddy” Combs is facing intensifying legal pressure as federal prosecutors urged a judge to “swiftly reject” his bid for acquittal or a new trial following his conviction on two Mann Act charges tied to prostitution-related conduct.
In a pointed court filing, prosecutors argued the evidence against the embattled mogul was “overwhelming,” citing detailed testimony that Diddy orchestrated sexual encounters involving male escorts transported across state lines from 2008 through 2024.
“The evidence supporting the defendant’s guilt was overwhelming,” prosecutors wrote, doubling down on the jury’s decision and pushing back against the defense’s claim that the acts were consensual or protected as “amateur pornography.”
They also rejected the argument that the Mann Act is too vague or unconstitutional, stating the law does not violate due process or First Amendment protections.
Prosecutors painted a picture of control and coercion, stating, “He asserted substantial control over Ventura and Jane’s lives… controlled and threatened Ventura’s career, controlled her appearance, and paid for most of her living expenses, taking away physical items when she did not do what he wanted.”
The government’s filing came in response to a motion filed in late July by Diddy’s legal team, which asked the court to either toss the conviction or grant a retrial.
Diddy’s Legal Team Argue Feds “Painted Him As A Monster”
His attorneys claimed the trial was unfairly influenced by unrelated allegations of racketeering and sex trafficking — charges the jury ultimately dismissed.
They argued the government “painted him as a monster” and relied on “20-year racketeering enterprise and of sex trafficking multiple women… [that] were not supported by credible evidence, and the jury rejected them.”
Diddy’s lawyers also challenged the application of the Mann Act in this case, saying it was unprecedented to use it against consensual adult encounters, which they described as “freak-offs” or “hotel nights.”
They claimed the acts were private, consensual and fell under the umbrella of “amateur pornography,” protected by the First Amendment.
Still, prosecutors maintained the jury got it right and urged the judge to deny any attempt to revisit the verdict.
They also pushed back against the defense’s request for leniency, reiterating that Diddy should serve several years in prison.
