What we know about the case against Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs
The trial against Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs is kicking off. How strong is the case against him? Here’s what we know now.
Sean “Diddy” Combs is accused of leading a crew of criminals who used sexual abuse, kidnapping, bribery and forced labor to build a mecca of power and money.
So, why is he the only one on trial?
Combs, 55, is facing charges of sex trafficking, transportation to engage in prostitution and racketeering, which consists of directing an illegal enterprise under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, known as RICO. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
Because it takes more than one person to form an organization, RICO cases typically name multiple defendants. While the statute was created to target mob bosses, it is often used to prosecute other types of criminals, such as gang members, drug dealers and fraudsters. In recent years, singer R. Kelly and late financier Jeffrey Epstein have been charged with racketeering for sexually abusing multiple victims for years.
Combs’ trial began with jury selection May 5 in federal court for the Southern District of New York, and testimony is expected to get underway the week of May 12. Clues hidden in court records suggest who his co-conspirators might be and who may testify against him.
Combs’ attorneys have said they believe the government started investigating him after his former girlfriend, Cassandra Ventura Fine, better known by the stage name Cassie, filed a civil suit against him in November 2023. Prosecutors have declined to be interviewed.
In general, as prosecutors build a RICO case, they gather evidence against several people, then offer deals to the ones with less involvement in exchange for testimony against the kingpin. If a criminal case is filed “under seal,” or secretly, the names of everyone who plans to fight the charges tend to be revealed at the same time.
In federal court, the law allows the names of people who plan to cooperate to remain secret until they take the stand.
The indictment against Combs was initially filed under seal. When it was made public in September 2024, he was identified as “Sealed Defendant 1.” This means there must be other defendants whose cases are still sealed.
That’s almost certainly because they have agreed to testify on behalf of the prosecution, according to Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and a former federal prosecutor.
“During the investigation, my guess is that there are agreements that were made,” she said. “And so, for the people who are testifying − assuming they’re insiders − I would expect that they have some kind of deals.”
Sometimes those deals involve guilty or no contest pleas to lesser charges. Sometimes, they allow people to avoid charges altogether, especially if someone was both a victim and a co-conspirator. In sex trafficking cases, for example, it’s not uncommon for women who have been forced into sex to later recruit other victims.
Will Kristina Khorram testify against Diddy?
The criminal RICO statute and the civil one are largely the same, according to Daniel Richman, a professor at Columbia Law School and former prosecutor in the Southern District of New York, where Combs’ trial is taking place. Only the penalties and the burden of proof are different − a 20-year prison term, fines and “beyond a reasonable doubt” for criminal; a financial hit and “more likely than not” for civil.
That means the same conduct alleged against Combs’ associates in civil suits could also form the basis of the criminal investigation. So it’s reasonable to expect that some of them will testify for the prosecution during the trial.
Two people have been named as defendants in at least three of the civil cases.
Kristina “KK” Khorram, who worked as Combs’ chief of staff, has been named as a defendant in at least three civil suits and is mentioned in others.
Her attorney, Deborah Colson, would not tell a reporter if Khorram would be testifying at Combs’ trial.
Khorram is listed as a co-defendant in a suit filed by Ashley Parham, who accused Combs, Druski (born Drew Desbordes) and Odell Beckham Jr. of a violent gang rape. All three have denied the claims, and police have called Parham’s claims “unfounded.”
Parham also claimed Khorram threatened her before the assault.
Khorram also is named as a defendant in a civil suit filed by Rodney “Lil Rod” Jones. He alleged that she instructed other employees to acquire drugs and hire sex workers. Jones also claimed that when he complained to Khorram about Combs touching him inappropriately, she said that was how the music mogul showed affection.
A suit filed by Seven Guzel accuses Khorram of arranging the hotel accommodations and transportation that made it possible for Combs to repeatedly assault her. Guzel claims Khorram obtained the drugs Combs gave victims and covered up his abuse.
In a statement, Khorram denied involvement or knowledge of criminal activity.
“These false allegations of my involvement are causing irreparable and incalculable damage to my reputation and the emotional well-being of myself and my family,” Khorram said in the statement. “I have never condoned or aided and abetted the sexual assault of anyone. Nor have I ever drugged anyone.
“The idea that I could be accused of playing a role in – or even being a bystander to – the rape of anyone is beyond upsetting, disturbing, and unthinkable. That is not who I am and my heart goes out to all victims of sexual assault. I am confident that the allegations against me will be proven to be untrue.”
Former Bad Boy president Harve Pierre denies wrongdoing
Harve Pierre, former president of Bad Boy Records, also is named as a defendant in at least three civil suits.
Anna Kane, who originally filed her civil suit under a pseudonym, alleges that she was 17 when she met Pierre in Michigan in 2003. She says Pierre persuaded her to travel with him via private jet to Daddy’s House Recording Studio in New York, where she claims Pierre, Combs and a third man raped her.
In a statement first reported by TMZ, Pierre denied Kane’s allegations.
“This is a tale of fiction. I have never participated in, witnessed, nor heard of anything like this, ever,” he said. “These disgusting allegations are false and a desperate attempt for financial gain.”
Pierre also is named in a suit filed by Dawn Richard of Danity Kane and Diddy −Dirty Money. In the suit, Richard describes being locked with Kalenna Harper in a Bentley with no inner door handles and no heat the day before Dirty Money performed on Saturday Night Live in December 2010. She had no coat and none of her belongings but used Harper’s cell phone to call her father from the car, which was parked outside SIR Studios.
The suit claims Harper was quickly released but Richard was trapped in the vehicle for more than two hours.
“Only after her father arrived and demanded to see her did Mr. Pierre order Mr. Combs’ bodyguard to release Ms. Richard from the vehicle,” the suit says. “Mr. Pierre ushered Ms. Richard’s father between several rooms at SIR Studios, where he waited for approximately two hours before being able to confront Mr. Combs.”
Sara Rivers, former star of the MTV series Making the Band and the group Da Band, also named Pierre as one of more than two dozen co-defendants in her civil RICO suit against Combs. In the suit, Rivers, who used the name Sara Stokes at the time, alleges that she and her bandmates were subjected to an abusive environment while making the show.
“Defendants have unlawfully increased their profits by luring individuals such as plaintiff under false pretenses for defendants’ personal desire, deviances and gain,” the suit says.
Attorney Scott E. Leemon, who is representing Pierre in the suits filed by Kane and Richard, did not return messages from USA TODAY. In a legal filing, he said Richard’s allegations didn’t “support a reasonable inference that Mr. Pierre … ‘enabled’ Combs’ conduct.”
No attorney is listed for Pierre on the docket in Rivers’ case.
Singers Cassie and Dawn Richard likely to testify against Combs
The victims set to testify in the criminal case also are anonymous in documents filed by the prosecution.
But a letter from Combs’ attorneys to the judge dated April 28 provides enough information to identify them. In the letter, the lawyers ask U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian to prohibit “anticipated witnesses’ lawyers” from making statements to the media.
One of the lawyers called out in the letter is Lisa Bloom, who represents two of Diddy’s accusers: Richard and a male entertainer from Las Vegas who filed suit anonymously. The letter includes links to two videos in which Bloom discusses Richard’s suit against Combs. That means the potential government witness the defense lawyers are referring to is Richard.
The same document indicates that Ventura Fine is the woman prosecutors are calling “Victim 1.” It links to two news stories in which her civil attorney, Douglas Wigdor, criticizes defense attorneys for claiming that a video of Combs abusing her in a hotel hallway in 2016, aired by CNN in May 2024, was doctored.
At a hearing May 1, the judge asked Combs’ lawyers to provide the legal basis for its request. When they didn’t, the matter was dropped – although the judge noted that either party could ask for a limited gag order preventing certain statements in the future if “any additional concerns arise.”
The civil attorneys or their representatives are likely to be present in court to observe the trial, since what happens there could have a significant impact the outcome of their clients’ lawsuits. That’s because RICO is one of the few laws under which decisions about testimony and evidence made on the criminal side also rule the day on the civil side.
So if the criminal prosecutors were able to prove Combs raped Kane, for example, she wouldn’t have to prove it again as part of her civil suit. As a result, she would be more likely to be awarded financial compensation.
“It depends on what the proof is, but she’ll certainly have an easier path to recovery,” according to Richman, the Columbia law professor.
The same goes for other civil defendants who may have reached previously secret plea deals that will be revealed during Combs’ trial.
A guilty verdict could also make it easier for the civil plaintiffs to actually receive compensation from Combs, since federal authorities would then be able to seize many of his assets.
“Pretty much anything that’s been connected with the illegal activity, they forfeit that to the government,” said Levenson, the Loyola Law School professor. “They’re often used for restitution for the victims, … because you don’t want people to profit from ill-gotten gains.”
Taijuan Moorman of USA TODAY contributed to this story.
Gina Barton is an investigative reporter at USA TODAY. She can be reached at (262) 757-8640 or [email protected]. Follow her on X @writerbarton or on Bluesky @writerbarton.bsky.social.
