@meghannmcuniff: The big issue in Sean "Diddy" Combs' appeal of his convictions and 50-month prison sentence is whether Judge Arun Subramanian wrongly increased the sentence because of fraud and coercion that shouldn't have been considered under a new sentencing guideline that prohibits judges from factoring in acquitted conduct. Subramanian said when sentencing Combs last October that the fraud and coercion enhancement was based on conduct related to Combs' convictions for transportation for prostitution, instead of only relating to his acquittals for racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion. A three-judge panel at the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals heard argument on Thursday (April 11) in New York City. Combs' lawyer Alexandra Shapiro argued Judge Subramanian cited incidents that aren't actually connected to prostitution, including Combs threatening to release sexually explicit videos of Casandra "Cassie" Ventura during a flight home from the Cannes Film Festival. "There's no evidence that, even on the airplane, they were planning a so-called freak off. And moreover, there was no evidence in the record that there was a freak off other than Ms. Ventura's testimony," Shapiro said. "Wait, wait a minute. Pause, pause, pause. You just said there was no evidence other than a witness's testimony? Which is another way of saying there was trial evidence," said Judge William J. Nardini, a 2019 Donald Trump appointee. Shapiro said "not only was this argued to the jury in the summation, but the jury sent back a note asking for quote, 'Casandra Ventura testimony regarding Cannes and the events immediately following.'" "And we know that the jury rejected the notion ... that there was coercion and connection with that incident," Shapiro said. Nardini said he thought Shapiro was "just arguing a different thing, that the defendant did not have an intent for purposes of the Mann Act ... because then you were saying there was no evidence that a freak off even happened." The judge said Shaprio's argument is going beyond lack of coercion to "now you're saying they also found that none of this even happened. And I don't see how that follows." "That's not what I said," Shapiro said. "Well, you said there was no evidence that the freak off happened, except for Ventura's testimony. And then you were trying to argue the jury necessarily rejected Ventura's testimony. And I guess you're saying, because they rejected the argument of the government, that it was her testimony showed there was coercion, they must have rejected every single thing that Ventura said," the judge said. "That's not what I said," Shapiro said again. "Well, that was the implication. So let's back up," Nardini said. "Well that's not what I meant to imply," Shapiro said. "The whole Mann Act charges were basically an afterthought at this trial. They took up almost no time. The government relied principally on these two charts. And if you look at government exhibit 1402," Shapiro said as Nardini interjected. "I understand that, and you made that point very well in your brief. So isn't your argument really that what the government is doing here is mixing and matching. You're taking evidence from the claims that were acquitted to try to support the the Mann Act sentencing for purposes of the Mann Act, but none of that was presented to the jury for purposes of the Mann Act. Is that a summation of what, where —" Nardini said. "That's fair," Shapiro said. The judges have not yet issued their ruling.

Meghann Cuniff

Open In TikTok:

Region: US

Friday 10 April 2026 17:49:11 GMT