Federal prosecutors in the Diddy case are pushing back against the music mogul, rejecting his attempts to downplay his convictions for transporting male escorts across state lines. They argue that there is legal precedent for the judge to deny him bail.
In court documents filed on Thursday and obtained by TMZ, prosecutors outlined their reasons for why Diddy should remain incarcerated while awaiting sentencing, following his conviction on two counts of violating the Mann Act. Notably, Diddy was acquitted of more serious charges related to racketeering and s*x trafficking.
On Wednesday, Diddy submitted documents requesting that Judge Arun Subramanian overturn his Mann Act conviction. He argues that the crime pertains to the transportation of people across state lines for s*xual purposes, which Diddy denies.
He claims he never engaged in sexual activities with any of the escorts; rather, he asserts that only his girlfriends did. Additionally, he contends that he did not arrange their transportation or payment for the so-called “freak-offs.”
He stated that he was merely a voyeur and amateur pornographer recording the escorts having s*x with his ex-girlfriends, Cassie and “Jane,” who he claims made arrangements for the sexual encounters. Alternatively, he’s asking the judge for a new trial solely on the Mann Act counts.
Prosecutors are now firing back, noting Diddy has failed to show the court any evidence to mitigate his crimes, which might justify releasing him on bail.
In their filing, prosecutors cite two prior federal cases in which judges denied defendants bail after convictions under the Mann Act. They say say both cases are almost carbon copies of Diddy’s, because the defendants were also facing sex trafficking charges, but were only convicted of Mann Act violations.
Further, they say Diddy’s attempt to describe himself as simply a “John,” ignores the fact he “transported individuals for the purpose of prostitution on hundreds of occasions over the course of decades.”
