Sean Combs’s lawyer made a final appeal to the jury at his racketeering and sex trafficking trial in New York on Friday, arguing in often sarcastic tones that the government’s evidence contradicted its case against the hip-hop mogul.
The lawyer, Marc Agnifilo, portrayed his client as a deeply flawed man who led a swinger’s lifestyle, had a drug problem and sometimes physically assaulted his girlfriends. But he argued government’s accusation that Mr. Combs was a sex trafficker or the ringleader of a racketeering organization was “badly exaggerated.”
“He did what he did,” Mr. Agnifilo said. “But he’s going to fight to the death to defend himself from what he didn’t do.”
Here are some takeaways from the defense’s closing argument.
The defense focused on consent, credibility and overreach.
Friday’s summation was the most substantive argument made to date by the defense, which called no witnesses during the trial and declined to put Mr. Combs on the stand.
Mr. Agnifilo devoted long stretches of his four-hour closing argument to highlighting testimony, texts and video evidence, that he said demonstrated that Casandra Ventura and “Jane,” who testified under a pseudonym, consensually participated in the marathon sex parties that are central to the government’s claim that the women were sex trafficked.
“You want to call it swingers, you want to call it threesomes,” he said, “whatever you want to call it, that is what it is — that’s what the evidence shows.”
Mr. Agnifilo cast doubt on the credibility of some of the government’s witnesses, taking particular aim at Capricorn Clark, a former assistant to Mr. Combs who testified that she had been kidnapped twice at his direction. In one of those instances, she said, Mr. Combs was in possession of a gun, a statement that the defense said was not supported by other witnesses.
At one point, Mr. Agnifilo suggested that the racketeering charge was an overreach and that Mr. Combs had been targeted by the government because the case began with a lawsuit, not anyone making a report to law enforcement. “He’s indicted by himself,” Mr. Agnifilo said, noting that no witnesses testified to being part of such an enterprise.
The prosecution later objected, arguing that Mr. Agnifilo’s suggestion that Mr. Combs had been targeted was improperly made in front of the jury. Judge Arun Subramanian agreed and told jurors that the decision-making of the government or a grand jury on whether to charge a defendant was “none of your concern.”
The defense offered an alternative view of the infamous video of a hotel assault.
Mr. Agnifilo presented an alternative narrative for a critical piece of evidence in the case: a security-camera video that showed Mr. Combs beating Ms. Ventura in a hallway of a Los Angeles hotel in 2016.
The jury has seen this footage numerous times during the seven-week trial, and witnesses described it from multiple angles, as well as what happened before and after the attack. The video also shaped public opinion of the case after CNN aired a version of it last year, prompting Mr. Combs to apologize, calling his behavior “inexcusable.”
The government contends the video shows Mr. Combs beating Ms. Ventura when she tried to leave a marathon sex session with a male prostitute. That would be evidence he had physically compelled her to participate, a key element in proving sex trafficking.
But Mr. Agnifilo characterized the attack as flowing from a quarrel over a phone, not punishment for leaving the “freak-off.” Early in the video, Ms. Ventura is seen walking down a hallway with a phone in her right hand, heading toward an elevator bank. Later, after Mr. Combs attacks her, he appears to retrieve the phone from her and walks back to the room with it.
A gap in the time code on the video, Mr. Agnifilo said, suggests that Ms. Ventura went back in their hotel room for three minutes and 42 seconds before a security guard arrived. “The point is,” Mr. Agnifilo said, “the room is not a scary place.”
Mr. Combs’s family was a focal point.
Mr. Agnifilo pointed out that six of the music mogul’s seven children were in the courtroom to offer support — “the seventh being an infant.” Mr. Combs’s mother, Janice, a frequent presence at the trial, was also in the gallery.
“You should know that,” Mr. Agnifilo told the jury. “You should know who he is,” he added, “the man takes care of people — that’s what’s in the evidence.”
Wrapping his closing statement, Mr. Agnifilo returned to Mr. Combs’s family ties to add stakes to his potential acquittal. “He sits there innocent,” he said of his client. “Return him to his family who have been waiting for him.”
On Friday morning, one of Mr. Combs’s sons, Christian Combs, released new music under the name King Combs. The seven-song EP includes a track with Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, called “Diddy Free.”
On it, King Combs, 27, raps about those who “try to play the victim” and states “[expletive] the world, critics and the witness.” Later, he says: “this Bible might come in handy / this rifle might come in handy” and repeats a chorus on which he promises not to sleep “’til we see Diddy free.”
Another of Mr. Combs’s sons, Justin Combs, arrived at court wearing a shirt that read “Free Sean Combs” on Friday, but a court officer quickly tapped him on the shoulder — those kinds of visible messages of support are not allowed. He left the courtroom and the message was not visible when he returned.
Mr. Agnifilo’s closing was marked by animated, often sarcastic, statements.
Mr. Agnifilo, who opened his closing argument with a warning to the jurors that he likes to pace while he talks, used an energetic delivery to hammer home the defense’s skepticism of the government’s case. Speaking forcefully, gesticulating and pacing, he reacted to the idea that Mr. Combs was in charge of a racketeering enterprise: “Are you kidding me?”
His demeanor loosened as he continued, and at one point Mr. Agnifilo made a reference to the 50th anniversary of “Jaws” and its quotable line “We’re going to need a bigger boat,” while poking fun at the investigators in the case: “We need a bigger roll of crime-scene tape!” Regarding the lubricant found in the raids of Mr. Combs’s homes, Mr. Agnifilo also gave a passionate “Whoo!” reminiscent of Al Pacino onscreen.
In the first 30 minutes of his summation, Mr. Agnifilo appealed to the jury’s emotions, throwing in personal asides, laugh lines and detailed characterizations of the witnesses in colloquial terms, working to keep them engaged while broadly brushing away the legitimacy of the charges.
At other times, his mockery was more direct. In referring to Ms. Ventura’s brief relationship with the rapper Kid Cudi, the defense lawyer became especially animated: “Cassie’s keeping it gangster!” he said, arguing that she was brazenly lying to both men, with no apparent fear of Mr. Combs.
“I’m getting myself a burner phone,” Mr. Agnifilo said, imagining Ms. Ventura’s mind-set at the time. “Whooooaaaa — a burner phone!” the lawyer added. “Someone’s got a burner phone!”
Ben Sisario, a reporter covering music and the music industry, has been writing for The Times for more than 20 years.
Julia Jacobs is an arts and culture reporter who often covers legal issues for The Times.
Joe Coscarelli is a culture reporter for The Times who focuses on popular music and a co-host of the Times podcast “Popcast (Deluxe).”
The post 4 Takeaways From the Defense’s Closing Argument at Sean Combs’s Trial appeared first on New York Times.
