Alleged victims of Sean “Diddy” Combs, besides his longtime former girlfriend Cassie Ventura, should be allowed to testify at his upcoming trial under pseudonyms because forcing them to reveal their true identities would impose “real costs on the victims and the public,” federal prosecutors said.
Victims 2, 3 and 4, as they’re identified in court papers, are each expected to testify in explicit detail about Combs’ alleged physical and sexual abuse.
Testifying under their real names, federal prosecutors said, would cause them “significant embarrassment, anxiety and social stigma in light of their anticipated testimony.”
The indictment alleges Combs sex trafficked Victims 2 and 3 and forced them into sexual situations — known as “freak-offs” — with male prostitutes. Combs has pleaded not guilty and denied the accusations. Defense attorneys have described the alleged victims as “former long-term girlfriends, who were involved in consensual relationships.”
Prosecutors said the alleged victims are concerned they will be “approached and harassed” by members of the press and the public.
“Victims have expressed serious concerns to the Government about the risks that association with this case will pose to their personal relationships and future employment,” prosecutors said.
Combs is scheduled to stand trial next month on five criminal counts.
Defense attorneys asked the judge to preclude evidence of other sexual assaults allegedly committed by Combs that do not form the basis of the criminal charges, arguing that evidence is coming too late.
“Yet now, on the eve of trial and after two superseding indictments, the government has surfaced a new plan to taint his trial with evidence about purported heinous acts,” the defense said. “These are entirely new, untested, uncorroborated, and uninvestigated allegations. All but one of the alleged incidents happened over twenty years ago, with the oldest dating to the 1980s.”
Specifics are redacted from court filings.
Prosecutors said the jury became entitled to hear from additional witnesses when Combs argued everything alleged in the indictment was part of his “private sex life, defined by consent, not coercion.”
“Having made plain his intention to argue at trial that he believed every alleged coercive sex act was consensual, the defendant has put his knowledge and intent squarely at issue,” prosecutors said.
They added the additional testimony “powerfully establishes that the defendant made no mistake when he coerced other victims into unwanted sex. It proves that the defendant intended to take the sexual gratification he wanted, regardless of consent.”
Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
