A federal prosecutor summed up the government’s case against the music mogul Sean Combs on Thursday, weaving strands of evidence from his seven-week trial on sex-trafficking and racketeering charges to portray him as the head of a criminal enterprise who “used power, violence and fear to get what he wanted.”
The prosecutor, Christy Slavik, focused much of her closing argument on the methods Mr. Combs used to coerce two women he dated — Casandra Ventura (the singer Cassie) and a woman who testified under the pseudonym “Jane” — to have sex with hired men while he watched in drug-fueled sessions known as “freak-offs,” “hotel nights” or “wild king nights.”
Here are four takeaways from the prosecution’s closing argument:
The prosecution said proving that women were coerced into one ‘freak-off’ was enough for a sex trafficking conviction.
A key point of contention has been whether Mr. Combs coerced the two women at the heart of the case into having sex with hired men, or if they were willing participants. In cross-examinations during the trial, the defense highlighted text messages in which the women expressed enthusiasm or excitement for the sessions.
Ms. Slavik clarified for jurors that the government is not arguing that all of the sex nights with male escorts constitute sex trafficking. She said the women had initially been willing to engage to please Mr. Combs, but later became unwilling participants who complied either because they feared he would hurt them physically or cut them off financially.
“If there is one time — one single freak-off that jurors find were the product of force, threats of force, fraud or coercion, Mr. Combs should be found guilty of sex trafficking,” Ms. Slavik said.
To underscore her point, she laid out several examples for each woman.
Those included a time in June 2024, Ms. Slavik said, that Jane and Mr. Combs physically fought before he directed her to have sex with an escort. Jane testified that she repeatedly said “I don’t want to,” but Mr. Combs — his face close to hers — asked “is this coercion?”
Ms. Slavik also pointed to Mr. Combs’s 2016 assault on Ms. Ventura at a Los Angeles hotel that was captured on surveillance video. “He was using force to cause Cassie to continue engaging in a freak-off,” Ms. Slavik said.
The prosecution laid out its theory of how Mr. Combs’s employees operated as a criminal enterprise.
Much of Ms. Slavik’s summation in the morning was devoted to arguing that Mr. Combs did not merely lead a typical celebrity entourage but instead ran an enterprise responsible for years of crimes.
To convict Mr. Combs on the racketeering charge, jurors need to find that he knowingly joined an unlawful conspiracy, and that Mr. Combs agreed that he or a co-conspirator would commit at least two criminal acts on that list to further the enterprise.
Ms. Slavik said an loyal inner circle of Mr. Combs’s employees carried out various crimes over more than a decade, most of them aimed at facilitating the freak-offs or covering them up. Those crimes, she said, include drug distribution, kidnapping, arson, bribery, sex trafficking, interstate transportation for prostitution and even forced labor.
She identified several employees as being part of the criminal enterprise, none of whom have been charged with a crime or testified. They included Kristina Khorram, Mr. Combs’s former chief of staff, often referred to as “K.K.,” and a group of security officers known as D-Roc, Faheem Muhammad, Uncle Paulie and Roger Bonds.
Examples of drug distribution alone, Ms. Slavik argued, were sufficient evidence to convict Mr. Combs of the racketeering charge because she said the trial testimony had established that he directed his employees to transport drugs several times for use in the sex sessions.
The evidence also showed instances of kidnapping by the group, Ms. Slavik told jurors. Ms. Ventura, for instance, was taken to a hotel to heal after a beating by Mr. Combs and spent more than a week there, watched over by members of Mr. Combs’s staff to ensure she did not leave.
Ms. Slavik also said Ms. Khorram and D-Roc were involved in bribing a hotel security officer to obtain incriminating security camera footage that showed Mr. Combs assaulting Ms. Ventura.
The prosecution laid out how it says Mr. Combs tampered with two witnesses, Jane and Mia.
For the first time, the jurors heard details of allegations that Mr. Combs had committed witness tampering and obstruction, one of the eight potential crimes that are part of his racketeering charge. Ms. Slavik provided two allegations connected with women who had testified under pseudonyms during the trial.
The prosecutor said that after Ms. Ventura filed her bombshell lawsuit that precipitated the criminal investigation, Jane was stunned by its similarities to her experience.
Shortly after Mr. Combs settled the lawsuit with Ms. Ventura, Ms. Slavik said, he called Jane twice in an effort to feed a “false narrative” that Jane was a willing participant in the sex marathons with male escorts in hotel rooms.
The jury heard recordings of the calls, in which Mr. Combs described the nights as “kinky” encounters “that I thought we both enjoyed.” In the second call, he told her, “I really need your friendship right now,” and assured her that if she “needed” him too, she “ain’t got worry about nothing else.” Around that same time, he texted an employee to ensure that Jane’s rent was being paid.
Ms. Slavik said Mr. Combs also tampered with “Mia,” one of his former assistants. Mia testified that after Ms. Ventura’s lawsuit, a bodyguard known as D-Roc called her and began to discuss Ms. Ventura’s relationship with Mr. Combs, saying something to the effect of “they would just like fight like a normal couple.”
Mia said D-Roc “sounded nervous” and said Mr. Combs missed her. Mr. Combs tried calling her, but she did not pick up, Mia said. Later, as Mr. Combs’s legal troubles were deepening, D-Roc texted her, “let me know how I can send you something.” She declined.
Mr. Combs brought a book to court.
Mr. Combs entered the courtroom wearing a baby-blue sweater and a smile, waving to family and friends who filled two rows near the front of the courtroom. The beginning of closing arguments drew perhaps the largest crowd yet to the courthouse over the trial’s seven weeks, and administrators were forced to open four courtrooms to handle those interested in watching the proceedings on closed circuit television.
As Ms. Slavik spoke for nearly five hours, presenting Mr. Combs as a violent, abusive man who was used to getting his way and deployed aides to help him secure it, he was an attentive defendant, shaking his head at one point, and often passing notes to his lawyers.
He did not have time to focus much attention on a book he had brought into the courtroom with him: “The Happiness Advantage,” by Shawn Anchor, described as “an engaging, deeply researched guide to flourishing in a world of increasing stress and negativity.”
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 Prosecution’s Closing Argument at Sean Combs’s Trial appeared first on New York Times.
