Sean “Diddy” Combs’ federal trial jurors were deadlocked Tuesday after reaching a verdict on four of the five counts against the rapper.
Two months after the trial kicked off, and nearly 14 hours into deliberations, jurors told Judge Arun Subramanian that they were unable to reach a unanimous decision on a racketeering charge.
The prosecution called more than 30 witnesses to the stand throughout seven weeks of testimony, while Diddy’s defense team rested without calling any witnesses on their behalf — a move considered “high stakes poker” by former federal prosecutor and Fox News contributor Trey Gowdy.
DIDDY JURY REACHES PARTIAL VERDICT IN SEX TRAFFICKING, RACKETEERING TRIAL
“Usually, when defense does not call witnesses, that defendant is called an inmate,” Gowdy explained. “I’ve said that my entire career. That’s a fancy way of calling someone an inmate. You gotta give the jury a reason for reasonable doubt and to simply say the prosecution hasn’t met its burden … most jurors don’t really understand what that burden is.”
He added, “Gotta give the jury a reason for doubt and if you don’t put up a very significant defense, all you do is cross-examine government witnesses, then you’re going to be an inmate.”
Diddy told the court last week that it was his decision not to testify in his sex crimes case. The judge asked if Diddy understood he had the right to testify or not testify, and if he had discussed his rights with his attorney. Diddy responded, “Yes, thoroughly,” before admitting it was “solely my decision” to not testify in his sex crimes trial.
Jurors began deliberating on Monday, June 30, and of the five counts, could not agree on a verdict for the racketeering charge, one of the most serious counts against the disgraced music mogul. A federal RICO violation can result in a 20-year sentence. The transportation to engage in prostitution charge could carry a sentence of up to 10 years, while sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion may carry a 20-year sentence.
“It’s very complicated — most lawyers cannot explain RICO, so to expect 12 people, average citizen jurors to understand a criminal enterprise, predicate acts … it’s just a lot to ask,” Gowdy said. “There’s a reason to charge it even if you don’t win. It opens evidentiary doors that might be closed, so lots of times prosecutors will charge something because it enables you to get extra evidence before a jury even though you don’t really expect to get a guilty verdict on that count.”
LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS
Criminal defense attorney John W. Day, owner of the Santa Fe, New Mexico-based law practice John Day Law, told Fox News Digital that jurors may have had a difficult time comprehending the RICO charge.
“Was Diddy’s high-flying and maybe disturbing lifestyle just that, or can you really pick out a criminal enterprise that is the equivalent of an organized crime family?” Day said. “But tomorrow morning the judge will be hoping that after a night of thinking about it, the jurors will have second thoughts about a split verdict on RICO — one way or the other — and come back with a unanimous verdict on that most serious charge.”
Criminal defense attorney Nicole Blank Becker, who represented R. Kelly, explained that the predicate acts against Diddy were the “building blocks” to establish a RICO charge. Whether a jury can agree on a verdict or not remains to be seen.
“So what happens is now they’re forced to go back in there, and there’s probably going to be a lot of frustration back there, more fighting back and forth,” Becker said. “My understanding is that the jurors’ verbiage was something to the effect of that they’re at a point where there’s unpersuadable opinions on both sides. So clearly some of the jurors thinking, ‘Well, obviously he’s guilty.'”
The judge instructed the jury to continue deliberating for now. A second option would be to give supplemental jury instructions. Lastly, the jury could return a partial verdict. However, Judge Subramanian said he is not considering the third option at this point, and chose to have a portion of the jury charge re-read.
Criminal defense attorney Eric Faddis, founding partner of Colorado-based Varner Faddis, agreed that the RICO charge was the most complicated of all the charges.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER
“The jury could be hung up on the different requirements of the charge, including the criminal enterprise element,” Faddis said. “I suspect that may be a sticking point because the government didn’t charge any co-conspirators and never called any other alleged members of this criminal enterprise.”
WATCH: PROSECUTORS ACCUSED DIDDY OF RUNNING A ‘CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE’
He added, “At this point, it’s unclear whether the partial verdict could give rise to any grounds for appeal.”
The government emphasized in their argument that Diddy ran an alleged criminal enterprise with full control. The prosecution pointed out that the jury heard testimony, saw texts, viewed bank records and heard audio allegedly showing the “Last Night” rapper committing crime after crime for decades.
According to the prosecution, the government showed Diddy didn’t take no for an answer. “Up until today, Diddy was able to get away with crime because of money and power,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Christine Slavik said. “That stops now.”
The verdict for the four counts reached came “fairly quickly,” according to Austin-based criminal defense attorney Sam Bassett.
“It seems the jury has struggled and spent most of their time debating the more serious and complex racketeering count,” Bassett noted. “If I was the defense, I’d be concerned, but you never know what a jury will do. For this lengthy of a trial, a 13-hour deliberation is on the short side of expectations.”
When the jury was brought back into the courtroom, the judge asked them to keep deliberating, saying it is their duty to discuss among themselves and form opinions.
Judge Subramanian said the jurors must reach a unanimous verdict, but must not give up their convictions merely to return a verdict or satisfy the rest of the jurors. The jury was then dismissed back to the jury room. Court concluded after 5 p.m., and the jury was asked to return on Wednesday before 9 a.m.
“Both sides stated that they do not want to accept a partial verdict,” attorney David S. Seltzer told Fox News Digital. “This forces the jury to render a complete verdict, which ultimately could lead to a hung jury on the count at issue if they cannot render a verdict on all counts, and thus lead to a possible retrial on the hung count.
“As for appellate issues, there will be many, and depending on how the case resolves, this may be another issue for appeal.”
