Context:

After 28 days of testimony, both the prosecution and defense rested their cases in Sean Combs's federal sex-trafficking and racketeering trial, during which Combs chose not to testify. Prosecutors accused Combs of coercing women into drug-fueled sexual activities with male escorts, while the defense argued the women were willing participants in these encounters that occurred during long-term romantic relationships. The defense focused on text messages showing the women's consent and enthusiasm, and contested the prosecution's depiction of Combs as the leader of a criminal conspiracy. Although Combs actively participated in his defense, his legal team relied primarily on cross-examinations to challenge the prosecution's witnesses and evidence. The trial highlighted complex relationships, with closing arguments scheduled to begin soon, as the prosecution's case narrowed with some expected witness testimonies not materializing.

Dive Deeper:

• Sean Combs, also known as a music mogul, decided not to testify in his federal trial for sex-trafficking and racketeering, letting his lawyers present his defense. His legal team focused on evidence and cross-examination rather than calling new witnesses, emphasizing the mutual consent in his relationships with the women involved.

• Federal prosecutors alleged that Combs orchestrated events where women were coerced into engaging in drug-influenced sexual activities with male escorts, presenting a pattern of criminal behavior that included kidnapping, arson, and forced labor. Witness testimonies aimed to link Combs to these activities through firsthand accounts and relationships with the women at the center of the case.

• The defense argued against the prosecution's narrative, suggesting the women were not coerced but were instead willing participants, highlighting years-long romantic relationships. Text exchanges between Combs and the women, particularly Ms. Ventura, were presented to suggest mutual affection and voluntary engagement in the sexual encounters.

• Combs's legal team contended that the government failed to prove the involvement of his employees in a racketeering conspiracy, asserting that they were unaware of the specifics of the alleged trafficking activities. They argued that the employees were merely performing personal errands, challenging the prosecution's claims of a coordinated criminal enterprise.

• Throughout the trial, Combs remained actively involved in his defense, often communicating with his lawyers and reacting to the evidence presented. The prosecution's case faced challenges as not all expected witnesses testified, and the defense leveraged inconsistencies and testimonies of admiration from former employees to undermine the charges against Combs.