Diddy Jury Reaches Verdict on 4 of 5 Counts — Judge Instructs Them to Keep Deliberating

Elizabeth Williams via AP

After deliberating for two days, a federal jury in New York announced it had reached verdicts on four out of five counts against Sean “Diddy” Combs, and were instructed by the judge to go back and try again to reach a verdict on the final remaining count.

Verdict watch kicked off Monday as the jury headed back for their deliberations. Combs is facing five total felony counts: one of racketeering conspiracy, two counts of sex trafficking, and two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution.

Tuesday afternoon, the jury sent a note saying they had reached a verdict on counts 2 through 5, but had been unable to reach a verdict on count 1, for racketeering conspiracy.

Combs’s trial in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York began on May 5, with District Judge Arun Subramanian presiding.

Prosecutors have argued Combs masterminded a decades-long criminal enterprise that abused, threatened, and coerced his victims, including Cassie Ventura, his ex-girlfriend whom he was seen violently assaulting in a now-infamous hotel surveillance video from March 2016, and another ex-girlfriend, pseudonymously referred to as “Jane” during the trial.

The 55-year-old rap mogul had initially denied Ventura’s accusations against him when she sued him in November 2023 saying Combs had raped, abused, and sex trafficked her for years. The lawsuit was settled out of court one day later; Ventura testified during this trial that the settlement was $20 million. A few days after the hotel video was obtained and published by CNN in May 2024, Combs posted a video on his Instagram account admitting to his “inexcusable” actions and saying he was “disgusted” with himself.

Last September, the court denied his defense attorneys’ motion for bail and ordered him held in federal custody during the pendency of the trial. An appeal the next day was rejected and the trial court’s denial of bail and pre-trial detention was affirmed.

Legal experts have said that Combs could spend the rest of his life behind bars if he is convicted, due to the serious nature of the charges against him, the alleged long time period during which the alleged crimes occurred, and total number of incidents involved. He pleaded not guilty to the charges and his legal team, led by attorney Marc Agnifilo, argued throughout the trial that any sexual encounters were legal and consensual.

Federal prosecutors delivered their closing arguments starting last Thursday, with Combs’ defense team taking its turn next and wrapping Friday, followed by the government’s rebuttal.

Legal experts had noted that one of the most complicated issues for the jury to determine — and one of the most difficult for prosecutors to establish — is whether the evidence supports a conviction for racketeering conspiracy. As The New York Times’ Joe Coscarelli reported Monday, “[t]he sprawling case presented by prosecutors encompassed two decades of what the government described as criminal behavior, including drug distribution, kidnapping, arson, bribery, sex trafficking, witness tampering and obstruction, interstate transportation for prostitution and forced labor.”

“To convict Mr. Combs of racketeering conspiracy,” Coscarelli explained, “jurors need to find that he and a co-conspirator worked together to commit at least two instances of criminal acts from the government’s list of examples. Drug distribution alone, the prosecutors argued, was sufficient to convict Mr. Combs of racketeering because they said the trial had shown that he and his employees participated in ‘hundreds of acts of drug distribution’ together.”

Judge Subramanian sent the jury home for the weekend, reported The New York Times, so they could “come back fresh on Monday morning” for their deliberations. The jurors’ identities have remained legally anonymous but they have not been sequestered during the trial.

On Monday, Subramanian spent a few hours going over the jury instructions before sending jurors out of the courtroom shortly before noon to begin their deliberations.

There was some drama Monday afternoon when the jury sent the judge a note that read, “We have a juror, No. 25, who we are concerned cannot follow your honor’s instructions.”

According to CNN, “Juror No. 25 is a 51-year-old male who works as a scientist and lives in Manhattan with his domestic partner.”

Alan Tuerkheimer, an attorney and jury consultant unaffiliated with Combs’ case, told CNN this was “significant” because it had “happened incredibly quickly.” This juror was “a wild card,” even with the expectation that deliberations “can get incredibly heated,” and it was “quite notable, especially at this early stage of the process,” for jurors to say one juror won’t follow instructions.

The situation was “possibly massive headache at this early stage in the game,” Tuerkheimer added, and potentially grounds for the defense to appeal if Combs is convicted. Subramanian already dismissed one juror earlier this month, Juror No. 6, due to inconsistent claims about his residence, a mandatory legal qualification to serve on the jury.

The judge ended up sending a note back to the jury, a step both sides had supported.

“I received your note,” read Subramanian’s note. “I remind every juror of their duty to deliberate and their obligation to follow my instruction on the law. With that instruction in mind, please continue deliberating.” The note also reminded the jurors not to reveal specifics about their deliberations if they send other notes.

During the course of the deliberations, the jury sent other notes asking for clarification of a definition of one of the charges and transcripts of the testimony of multiple key witnesses, common requests for complicated criminal trials.

Shortly after 4 pm ET on Tuesday afternoon, the jury sent a note that read, “We have reached a verdict on counts 2, 3, 4 and 5. We are unable to reach a verdict on count 1 as we have jurors with unpersuadable opinions on both sides.” The remaining count 1 is for racketeering conspiracy, and both sides said they hoped Subramanian would send the jury back to continue efforts to reach a verdict on count 1, but wanted the judge to bring the jury out to deliver that instruction in person, rather than just via note.

According to CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig, a judge in this situation has multiple options, including instructing the jury to return to the deliberation room without sharing their verdicts on counts 2 through 5, work to reach a verdict on count 1, and then have all 5 verdicts read at once. Another option is for the judge to ask the jury for their verdicts on 2 through 5 — “once you announce those verdicts in court, they’re final, you can’t take them back” — and send the jury back to continue deliberating on count 1.

Shortly after 5 pm ET, Subramanian brought the jurors back in to the courtroom and instructed them to keep deliberating.

“I received your note that you have reached verdicts on count 2-5 but not on count 1,” Subramian said. “I ask at this time that you keep deliberating.” The judge sent them back to decide if they would continue deliberating that evening or return in the morning.

A few minutes later, the jury sent a note saying they had concluded for the day and would resume deliberations at 9 am ET Wednesday. Subramian dismissed them.

This is a breaking news story and has been updated with additional information.