A New York judge put a period this month at the end of Sean “Diddy” Combs‘ federal sex-crimes saga, sentencing him to over four years in prison.
The sentence, a middle ground between the prosecution’s requested 11 years and the defense team’s plea for 14 months, represents a significant blow to the music mogul.
After surfing a decades-long tidal wave of success, Combs faced apocalyptic legal challenges over the past year, enduring not only the closely watched federal trial, but an onslaught of civil cases alleging years of sexual abuse.
As the #MeToo movement enters a tumultuous new era, experts seem torn about what Combs’ case changed − if anything.
Some experts say that a man as powerful and prominent as Combs serving any prison time at all is a win. Others, however, point to the jury’s acquittal as indicative of the way criminal courts continue to fail survivors.
Diddy’s sentencing is impactful, but shows ‘how far the system still has to go,’ experts say
The trial, which brought Combs’ ex-girlfriend Cassie Ventura Fine to the stand at almost nine months pregnant, saw her and other women recount years of alleged sexual and psychological abuse at the hands of the Bad Boy Records founder. Punctuated by disturbingly graphic descriptions of drug-fueled sex marathons, dubbed “freak offs,” the proceedings forever altered Combs’ reputation, adding his name to a growing list of entertainment giants brought down by allegations of assault and misconduct.
Lindsay Richards, a criminal defense lawyer and former prosecutor, tells USA TODAY that Combs’ sentencing would “greatly impact the landscape surrounding the prosecution of sexually violent crimes.”
A harsh sentence would have sent a message that “the voices of these survivors matter,” she says, “that sexual performance through manipulation, abuse, and control is not consensual and should not be minimized.”
But a lighter punishment would have made “an excuse for the inexcusable,” Richards warned.
That the actual sentence falls in the middle creates a gray area − further widened by the jury’s mixed verdict.
The jury convicted Combs on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution, but acquitted him on the more serious charges of sex trafficking and racketeering.
“Throughout the trial, Judge Arun Subramanian has been remarkably unflinching in calling out the defense’s poor treatment of witnesses,” and has shown “a rare, deep understanding of how abuse works,” Dr. Ann Olivarius, an attorney who specializes in discrimination and sexual assault, tells USA TODAY.
Ahead of his sentencing, Combs wrote a letter to the judge pleading for leniency.
He had hoped to walk free and be credited with time already served.
Subramanian, at the Oct. 3 sentencing, cited the “massive” evidence of harm inflicted by Combs, including hotel surveillance video shown during the trial of the music mogul’s “savage beating” of Ventura Fine as well as pictures of gashes, bruises and broken doors.
“You abused them physically, emotionally and psychologically,” Subramanian told Combs. “That is the reality of what happened. These were serious offenses that irrevocably harmed these two women.”
Subramanian “was bound to disappoint both the defense and the prosecution because of the jury’s split verdict,” Olivarius says. “This ‘safe compromise’ of 50 months was not the triumphant exoneration that Combs demanded, but nor was (it) the compensation for the innocent verdicts the prosecution had hoped for.”
Diddy sentencing underscores imperfect system, Cassie’s impact
Still, to see Combs shed tears in court, denied a quick release and sentenced to serve real time in a federal facility, may offer survivors hope.
“At the end of the day, this is a lengthy sentence,” says Anna Cominsky, an associate law professor and the director of the Criminal Defense Clinic at New York Law School. “It’s not just the sentence itself, it’s what the judge had to say coupled with the sentence … The judge focused on the victims.”
“Every single time that prosecutors decide to prosecute a case like this and every single time that prosecutors say to a victim, ‘We believe you and we think there’s enough here to charge,’ that is empowering those victims,” Cominsky says.
Still, she says, “that doesn’t mean that it’s a perfect system.”
Elisa Batista, a campaign director at nonprofit women’s advocacy group UltraViolet, thinks that’s an understatement.
“For the MeToo movement, this outcome reflects the persistence of half-measures, acknowledging harm but stopping short of full accountability, highlighting how far the system still has to go to deliver real justice,” the attorney adds.
Olivarius says the contrast between what Ventura Fine and other alleged victims “endured in criminal court” and “the justice they were served” at the sentencing “underscores” the argument that survivors have a better chance at true restitution in civil court.
“Traditionally, the criminal justice system has not served survivors,” Batista says. “It’s retraumatizing, forcing survivors to produce all kinds of evidence because the standard is different than in the civil case.”
Ventura Fine received a $20 million settlement for the civil case she filed against Combs in 2023.
That makes Batista even more in awe of Ventura Fine and the “domino effect” she had on other women and men filing an ever-growing avalanche of civil suits against the music mogul.
Combs’ trial, though not the triumph the survivors may hope for, is notable in its pure existence. “It’s huge that this case even made it to court, and the fact that he was convicted on anything is also significant,” Batista says.
As Combs readies to spend the next several years behind bars, it may be that the full fallout of his blockbuster trial is not yet in view. The possibility of an appeal, or presidential pardon, too, remains open.
What’s certain for Combs: The one-time king-maker of hip-hop has fallen from the throne, forever changed by the harrowing testimony that emerged from the Manhattan courtroom.
