Sean “Diddy” Combs has held a wide range of roles throughout his decades-long career. We’re talking everything from recording artist and reality TV star to fashion designer, and… amateur porn producer? Diddy’s legal team argued the latter title applied to their client, who is attempting to overturn his prostitution convictions.
According to legal documents reviewed by Complex, Diddy’s attorneys state that the hip-hop mogul’s infamous “freaks-off” videos were simply expressive content protected by free speech. Prosecutors claimed that Diddy coerced women into drug-fueled sex parties with male “entertainers” who were paid for the encounters. Diddy’s lawyers stated that some of the “freak-offs” were captured on video with consent from all parties. They even pointed to an incident in which Diddy agreed to stop filming after one of the escorts demanded he stop.
“Combs promptly turned the camera off on that occasion,” the document read, “which shows entertainers could object to recording.”
The defense also pushed back on the claim that Diddy had used the videos to “blackmail” the women he allegedly coerced into the so-called “freak-offs”; however, they state that the “homemade porn” was strictly for his and his girlfriends’ private use.
“The evidence also shows Combs and his girlfriends recorded the freak-offs and hotel nights so they could watch them together later,” the document continued. “Jane even bought Combs a portable screen for their ‘movie nights.’ [Cassie] Ventura likewise would routinely ‘watch [the videos] with Sean afterwards.’”
Diddy’s attorneys argue the evidence showed Diddy was acting as an amateur pornographer when he filmed the freak-offs, and upholding the aforementioned convictions would strip him of his First Amendment rights.
In early July, the court found Diddy not guilty of one count of racketeering conspiracy and two counts of sex trafficking. However, he was convicted of two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution, each carrying a maximum 10-year sentence in prison.
According to legal documents, Diddy’s attorneys state that the government used the wrong definition of “prostitution” when he was found guilty of violating the federal Mann Act, a century-old law that criminalizes the transportation of “any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose.”
The defense argued that the court applied the modern definition of prostitution during Diddy’s trial, when it should’ve used the definition that was applied in 1910, when the Mann Act was formally passed. While the contemporary definition applies to an individual who participates in sex acts in exchange for payment, Diddy’s lawyers state the older definition is much broader.
“If there was any settled ordinary meaning of ‘prostitute’ in 1910, it was a woman who has indiscriminate sex with men, whether paid or not,” the document read. “That was the common law meaning and the federal meaning under Bitty and Caminetti. If this Court were to apply that meaning, the statute would plainly be unconstitutional—which the government does not dispute.”
The defense lawyers also asserted that prosecutors failed to provide sufficient evidence that Diddy had organized interstate travel for the male “entertainers” with the intention of engaging in prostitution. They also claim there is “no evidence revealing any intent to pay escorts for sex during or before the travel.”
“The government merely points to evidence showing Ventura and Jane had sex (among other activities) with escorts after they traveled, and that escorts were sometimes paid,” the filing continued. “But that doesn’t prove that when Combs or his girlfriends organized travel for freak-offs or hotel nights, they did so to engage in prostitution.”
Diddy’s sentencing is set for October 3. His attorneys are seeking an acquittal or a new trial.