Who is Sean ‘Diddy' Combs, the onetime hip-hop king facing a sex trafficking trial?
NEW YORK: Sean 'Diddy' Combs, who elevated hip-hop in American culture while building a music and clothing empire that made him a billionaire, faces a sex trafficking trial starting with opening statements on Monday that could cement the rapper's shattered reputation - or offer him a shot at redemption.
The 55-year-old Combs, facing possible life in prison if convicted, is among the most influential and widely recognized men in the entertainment field to face sexual abuse allegations after the #MeToo movement encouraged accusers to speak up.
Like movie producer Harvey Weinstein and R&B singer R. Kelly, Combs is accused by prosecutors of using his influence and wealth to coerce women into unwanted sexual activity, and intimidate them into staying quiet for years.
Combs has pleaded not guilty to five felony counts including racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking. The trial, taking place in Manhattan federal court could last two months.
Combs' lawyers did not respond to a request for comment for this story. Since his arrest in September, Combs has been jailed in Brooklyn - far from the mansions in Miami and Los Angeles where he had been living, but about an hour by subway from the Harlem neighborhood where he was born. Advertisement · Scroll to continue
His father died four years after his birth, and Combs was raised by a single mother.
After two years at Howard University in Washington, Combs dropped out to go into the music business. He worked at New York's Uptown Records before co-founding Bad Boy Records in 1993.
Combs was a hustler and a showman. He is credited with turning artists like Mary J. Blige, Faith Evans, Notorious B.I.G. (Biggie Smalls) and Usher into stars, and broadening hip-hop's appeal in the 1990s and 2000s.
Musicians, athletes and actors angled to be in Combs' circle, while Combs flaunted a lavish lifestyle filled with diamonds, yachts and over-the-top parties. In the late 90s, he dated singer Jennifer Lopez, and they became one of entertainment's biggest power couples.
'He made hip-hop seem so vital and lively to American culture that everyone wanted to be a piece of it,' author Mark Anthony Neal said in the Max documentary 'The Fall of Diddy.'
Combs won three Grammy awards including for 'I'll Be Missing You,' a 1997 tribute to Biggie after he was killed in a drive-by shooting.
He built on his celebrity by launching the multimillion-dollar Sean John clothing brand and Revolt TV cable network. Combs even became a Broadway headliner, starring in 'A Raisin in the Sun' in 2004.
Combs has sold his stake in Revolt. A spokesperson for Combs did not respond to a request for comment about the status of Sean John.
By 2022, Forbes magazine estimated Combs' wealth had topped $1 billion, and his rags-to-riches story was seen as an inspiration for other Black men. That same year, Combs received a lifetime achievement honor at the BET Awards.
'Anything I do is through love,' Combs said at the ceremony.
'Collateral' recordings
Not so, according to prosecutors.
They contend that Combs, backed by his business empire, forced women into elaborate sexual performances known as 'Freak Offs' with male sex workers from 2004 to 2024. They say he coordinated 'Freak Offs' by giving drugs such as ketamine and ecstasy to women, while also promising financial support, career support and romantic relationships.
Combs watched and, on occasion, recorded the performances, and masturbated, according to prosecutors.
They say Combs used surreptitious recordings of the sex acts as 'collateral' to ensure that women stayed silent, and sometimes displayed weapons to further intimidate them, prosecutors said.
Marc Agnifilo, a lawyer for Combs, has said the sexual activity described by prosecutors was consensual.
One of the prosecution's expected witnesses is Combs' former girlfriend Casandra Ventura, an R&B vocalist known as Cassie.
Ventura sued Combs in November 2023, accusing him of rape and serial physical abuse during their decade-long professional and romantic relationship, which he denied. She settled just one day after suing. Settlement details were not disclosed.
Later, CNN broadcast hotel surveillance video showing Combs striking and dragging Ventura. Combs then apologized.
Dozens of other women and men have filed civil lawsuits accusing Combs of sexual abuse. He has denied all wrongdoing. Fortune magazine estimated that Combs' net worth fell to about $400 million by 2024.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
17 hours ago
- Express Tribune
YouTuber Vitaly posts bail after arrest for pranks in the Philippines, returned to immigration custody
Russian-American YouTuber Vitaly Zdorovetskiy, known for his controversial prank content, has posted bail after being arrested in Pasay City for harassing Filipinos. Despite being granted temporary liberty by the Taguig City Regional Trial Court Branch 153 on June 18, he remains under the custody of the Bureau of Immigration (BI) due to a pending deportation case. Photo: BI Zdorovetskiy, who faced charges of unjust vexation and other offences, was previously held by the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology from June 11. After the court allowed him to post bail, he was transferred back to the BI facility at Camp Bagong Diwa. BI Commissioner Joel Anthony Viado confirmed that the vlogger will not be allowed to move freely and will remain in detention. "He will not be allowed to roam around as he is already seen as an undesirable alien," Viado stated. Although Zdorovetskiy filed for temporary liberty, promising to stay within Metro Manila and not evade deportation, his request does not exempt him from BI custody. The vlogger was apprehended on April 2 following multiple public disturbances in Bonifacio Global City. In a now-viral Kick video titled 'Vitaly disturbing the peace in the Philippines,' he was seen impersonating a police officer, forcibly filming civilians, mocking a security guard with pop lyrics, and causing minor traffic incidents while driving a tricycle. Deportation proceedings are on hold until his local legal issues are resolved and any sentence is served.
Express Tribune
18 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Review: The Stationery Shop of Tehran
Marjan Kamali is an award-winning, Iranian-American novelist and author, whose books have received both national and international acclaim and have been translated and published in more than 25 languages. Born in Turkey to Iranian parents, she spent her childhood in Turkey, Iran, Germany, and Kenya, before settling in the US. Her debut novel, Together Tea, was published in 2013 and the third and till now the last, The Lion Women of Tehran, was published in 2024. The Stationery Shop under review here is her second book, published in 2019. Her second book, The Stationery Shop of Tehran is a bittersweet love story that is easy to read but full of intense feelings of love, betrayal, and longing. Seventeen-year-old Roya is a dreamy, idealistic schoolgirl living amid the political upheaval of 1950s in Tehran. Her favourite pastime is visiting the stationery shop owned by Mr Fakhri, who has stocked it well with shelves and shelves full of beautiful stationery items—fountain pens, shiny ink bottles, and thick pads of writing paper—but also carries translations of literature from all over the world as well as books of Rumi's love poetry. It is here in this shop that she meets 17-year-old Bahman, who is not only handsome but has a burning passion for justice and a love for Rumi's poetry and who, Mr Fakhri tells Roya, is 'the boy who wants to change the world'. Their romance, along with their mutual love of books and Rumi's poetry, blossoms, and the stationery shop remains their favourite place in all of Tehran. Her parents are forward-looking with liberal views and have ambitions for their daughters, with the father encouraging them to study well and become the likes of Marie Curie and Hellen Keller. They meet Braham and he is accepted not just because he is their daughter's choice but also because he holds similar political views as them—both are pro-democracy and support the then prime minister Mossadegh, who they believed was the only one who could stand up to the foreign powers. After the engagement, she feels more comfortable meeting him in public. She meets him for dates at café Ghanadi where he introduces her to pastries and coffee, as against Roya's normal drink—tea—and takes her to parties where she sees boys and girls mingling freely and learns to dance the tango. Everything in her life was changing and her thinking opened politically since she fell in love with Bahman, an activist. Those were the times when the country was in turmoil and then Bahman suddenly disappears, leaving Roya searching for him. She learns from Mr Fakhri that being an activist he had to go in hiding and the only way to contact him was through letters through Mr Fakhri. She revels this little contact and cherishes his letters. A few weeks before their planned marriage, for reasons unknown, they decide to secretly marry at the office of Marriage and Divorce, and he asks her to meet at one of the town squares. On the decided day—August 19, 1953, a day marked with violence in Iran's history—Roya alone waited for her fiancé at the town square, but Bahman never showed up. As violence erupts, she returns home dejected and later in the day learns of the coup d'état that changed their country's future (and theirs too). Roya tries desperately to contact Bahman but her efforts remained fruitless. It was as if he had disappeared from the face of the earth. Heartbroken Roya had to piece her life together for her parents' sake who, wanting her to be happy and safe, enrolled her and her younger sister Zari in Mills College in California. Both the sisters moved to California, on international scholarships, where they try to fulfil their father's dreams of scientific and literary careers for them. Moving from a sheltered family life into a new country they try to get used to the new ways of life (shaking hands, wearing shoes inside the house), new food (burgers and fries), and together learnt how to practice the nuances of a new language. Zari, whom back in Tehran, Roya often thought of vain and self-absorbed, 'absorbed this new American culture as though she were inhaling the air that would keep her from drowning', while Roya took her time. However, as time passed Roya too moved on, met and married Walter, and rebuilt her life. She is apparently happy with him and her life, though there had been difficult times such as the loss of her daughter. Yet such was her love for Bahman that no matter how many years went by, whenever Roya was alone in her thoughts, it was Bahman she reflected on. Though the readers' direct contact with Bahman was lost, we learn that four and a half years after the coup, or to say four and a half years since Roya and Bahman were to marry, Bahman married another woman. Bahman's friend Jahangir would sometimes pass on some news to Roya. It was from him that she learnt that Bahman was (ironically) 'working in the oil industry. Just as his mother wanted. Roya imagined him … going to work to learn how to maximise the profits of oil.' Through flashback, the reader learns about Bahman's past and his connection with Mr Fakhri. The story about the young lovers is pieced together through letters, that Bahman wrote to Roya but never sent. And then, sixty years after being separated and leading separate lives fate leads her back to Bahman and offers her a chance to ask him the questions that haunted her for more than half a century: Why didn't you come? Why and where did you disappear? How is it that you were able to forget me? Not only Roya but Bahman too wanted to know what happened and why Roya didn't come to meet him at the town square sixty years ago on that fateful day. Bahman had lost not only Roya but all the work he had done to bring about political change in his country. It is almost till the very end that the readers remain guessing what happened to Bahman and why he didn't come to the town square where he had promised to meet Roya and didn't even try to contact her later. One feels sad when one learns who manipulated and played with the fates of the young lovers, but I will leave it to the readers to discover it for themselves as writing any further would spoil the suspense that one carries till the end. The book is set in the Iran of 1950s (at least the first half of the book) when the country was in grips of political upheaval. During this devastating political havoc of 1953, that disrupted Roya and Bahman's lives, Mohammad Mossadegh was the prime minister of Iran. Many people in Iran loved him and believed that he was their democratic leader who had the courage to stand up to foreign powers who wanted their oil. He was 'hope' for the many people who felt he was the right man to achieve democracy. On the other hand, the anti-Mosaddegh people and the supporters of the Shah (Mohammad Reza Pahlavi) were not happy; they believed that Mosaddegh was a communist and not only wanted to replace him but wanted him dead. It was also believed that the anti-Mossadegh people had the support of Western powers as Mossadegh wanted control over Iran's oil. Demonstrations had been taking place and were getting ugly and frightening. Protesters were shouting 'Marg Bar Tudeh; Death to the Communists'. (Tudeh is Iranian communist party, formed in 1941) 'Murg Bar Mossadegh' (death to Mossadegh). After a failed coup attempt earlier, on August 19, 1953, (the day when Roya was waiting for Bahman at the town square), the protesters 'attacked the prime minister's house, looted some of its contents, ran off with the rest. Destroyed it.' Though Mossadegh managed to escape, the coup had succeeded. The world had changed forever. It is an eye opener how foreign powers support people with vested interests to prevent others from bringing a change in the national interest. Along with the history, the readers get a glimpse of life and culture of Iran in the 1950. The country was much liberal under the Shah, 'who continued the advocacy for the rights of women that his father Reza Shah had begun.' Roya's mother had 'dropped the hijab as soon as Reza Shah enforced a no-veil policy for women back in the 1930s. She welcomed reforms for the emancipation of women even as her more religious relatives cringed at farangi foreign-embracing ways.' There is also an interesting account of Roya visiting a local bath (hammam) where attendants give her a bath and pamper her; though there still are hammams in Iran, most people have baths in their homes. We note that even at that time political awareness was such that even the attending girls at the hammam openly expressed their views. There are multiple references to Nowruz—the Persian New Year—and detailed descriptions of recipes using saffron and rose water which fit seamlessly into the narrative, first in Tehran where we learn of the various Persian dishes that the girls' mother prepares and later they become Roya's connection to her past. She introduces Walter to Persian cuisine and often cooks them for him. Along with the love story of the two teenagers and life in Iran in the 1950, the book exposes the complexities of relationships and how they influence the lives of the loved ones, as well as issues of immigration and cultural assimilation, aging, regrets, sorrows, and quirks of fate. The fact that the book brings to life the political history of Iran makes it worth reading by those who love political fiction as well as those who want to familiarise themselves with the political history and culture of Iran. Rizwana Naqvi is a freelance journalist and tweets @naqviriz; she can be reached at naqvi59rizwana@ All facts and information are the sole responsibility of the writer
Express Tribune
18 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Trump's war on the undocumented
It begins in the dead of night – ICE agents raiding factories, restaurants and farms, while families sleep unaware as the state flexes its full disciplinary muscle, reviving the ghosts of America's exclusionary past with a vengeance that is unmistakably contemporary. What Donald Trump hails as 'the largest deportation operation in American history' is unfolding as a dark and sweeping expansion of state machinery – an iron-fisted blend of ICE raids, sprawling detention centres and legal shortcuts dug up from the dustiest corners of America's statute books to shore up both physical and social borders. Framed as the fulfilment of his campaign vows, Trump's vision for a 'new America' rests on what Italian philosopher Roberto Esposito terms 'immunitas': the sovereign's feverish attempt to insulate itself from perceived contamination. In the Trumpian worldview, the 'disposable labour' extracted from nations long ravaged by US foreign policy is now being cast aside like a used tool – mercilessly and by design. Even some of Trump's allies are starting to shift in their seats. Joe Rogan, one of his most prominent supporters, recently sounded an alarm: 'We've got to be careful that we don't become monsters while we're fighting monsters.' However, the warnings from the populist leader's base remain steeped in the same obscene necropolitical logic that draws lines between the human and the subhuman – the 'monsters'. The protests now erupting across the US are not new but mark a renewed moment of convergence between immigration enforcement and a long, bloody history of racialised labour control. From the Chinese Exclusion Act to ICE's post-9/11 rise, the American state has always policed its borders by criminalising racialised 'others' while exploiting their labour. The Trump-era raids echo the worksite crackdowns of the 1980s and Obama's courthouse arrests. However, with 80-strong factory raids, convoys blocking roads and National Guard troops deployed without state consent, this is a new escalation. There is no new crisis driving the ongoing assault but an old political trick: manufacture the spectacle of invasion to fuel nationalist panic and weaponise it against workers and dissent. Across the country, working-class communities – immigrant and non-immigrant alike – have taken to the streets. From handcuffed migrants to student walkouts, from union banners to handmade placards reading 'Mi familia, no se separa,' the resistance is multi-generational and deeply grounded. The border wars and the street wars have converged. For many, the raids are not just about immigration. They reject the logics of neoliberal 'security', challenging the premise that human life can be reduced to economic cost or to statistics in a detention ledger. In Washington, a different story is being told. The Trump administration, flanked by DHS officials and amplified by mainstream networks, insists this is a crackdown on 'criminals'. Protestors are dismissed as 'lawless mobs'. Trump, in his typical red meat rhetoric, even declared that Los Angeles had been 'invaded and occupied' and vowed to 'liberate' it. Attorney General Ashley Bell pledged to prosecute protestors aggressively. However, immigrant communities, organisers and rights activists see through the smoke, contending that the real criminals are those tearing families apart to prop up a neoliberal system that depends on cheap, precarious and deportable labour. Undocumented migrants have long formed a surplus army for US capitalism, hyper-exploitable because their fear makes them compliant. Seen through this lens, border enforcement is a farce dressed as a national security issue. It's about preserving racial capitalism, disciplining people of colour and preserving profit margins. The 'rule-of-law' narrative is thus inverted: the deeper violence lies not in protest, but in decades of war, trade policy and austerity that drive migration. Colonial Legacies and Necropolitics The domestic clashes cannot be understood without their global and historical context. The US border is not a neutral line. It is a colonial scar. From Indigenous dispossession to wars in Mexico and the Caribbean, the very idea of the border was forged in empire. Migrants fleeing violence and poverty in Central America or the Caribbean are not 'invaders', they are survivors of systems created, in part, by US policy. Their displacement is the aftershock of coups, land grabs and extractive economics. As protesters take to the streets with Mexican and Black flags, slogans like 'Here we stay' invoke historical truth: these cities were built by the very people now being hunted. Through the lens of Frantz Fanon, one sees how the immigrant becomes a 'zone of non-being', excluded from rights so the state can justify violence and deprived of the 'right to have all rights'. Fanon's psychology of the oppressed reveals that the migrant is demonised in discourse precisely to justify state violence. Indeed, as Fanon noted, the social order locks 'white people into whiteness, Black people into blackness'. The point is both theoretical and practical: immigrants exist outside the democratic community in the state's eyes, made 'other' so their rights are negotiable. Under such logic, US immigration policy embodies what Achille Mbembe has called necropolitics: the power to define who may live and who must die or suffer. Migrants in detention centres are literally at the mercy of a system designed to wear them down psychologically and physically. Reports of children in cages, or men packed into vans with little water, reveal a state's willingness to inflict slow violence. One organiser reported that 'intimidation and terror' – the kind seen in San Diego's restaurant raids – is now routine. The state is not just locking people up to fight crime. It is managing poverty while disciplining surplus lives. That's the essence of what Loïc Wacquant calls 'prisonfare'. Immigration raids slot neatly into this logic: not just law enforcement, but a pipeline into the detention-industrial complex. While the discourse on criminal justice reform grows louder, migrants remain outside its moral perimeter – detained without charges, deported without explanation, excluded from rights others are beginning to reclaim. By the Numbers Trump's ambition is staggering: one million deportations in his first year. The US currently houses around 13 million undocumented immigrants—roughly 4% of its population. Nearly 80% have lived in the US for over a decade, many with US-born children. In 2022, undocumented immigrants contributed $69 billion in taxes. And yet, they are being targeted en masse. ICE has just 6,000 officers, but Trump has expanded its powers, enlisted other federal agencies like the IRS, and reopened detention facilities. He has even floated reactivating Alcatraz. Legal protections are being stripped. Trump has fired immigration judges, expanded expedited removals and invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelans without hearings. Some were sent not to Venezuela, but to a supermax prison in El Salvador. Justifications included tattoos, nationality and assumed gang affiliation – no due process, no evidence. Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for migrants from Venezuela, Haiti and Afghanistan is also on the chopping block. Collateral arrests and raids in schools, churches, and hospitals are back. Even programs like Project Homecoming, which offer $1,000 to 'voluntarily' return, function as soft coercion. One calculation found that 72,000 people were deported in Trump's first 98 days, roughly 737 per day, nearly double the daily average under Biden. What remains, then, is a moral and political question: who belongs, and on what terms? If the answer depends on citizenship, productivity or compliance, then millions will remain outside the circle of rights. In the mainstream imagination, human rights are often tethered to the sanctity of citizenship. However, as Hannah Arendt famously warned, the stateless are those who have lost the 'right to have rights'. If rights are contingent upon national membership, then what remains for the undocumented, the displaced, the 'others' at the border of recognition? What happens next is uncertain. The administration has vowed to intensify its programme of detentions and deportations. But activists report that every raid is now met with instant organising by union halls, churches and community centres. Grassroots patrols spot ICE vehicles in advance, legal teams mobilise at courthouses and protest waves continue. Even as the White House drums up images of chaos, those on the ground insist their cause is orderly and just. In the words of a young organiser at a Philly vigil, this is more than crisis management – it is a moment of international morality: 'We're fighting for the working class, for immigrants, for our freedom. We won't back down.'
