Diddy’s Legal Team Is Pushing For Release Ahead of Sentencing

Sean “Diddy” Combs’ legal team has formally requested his release from jail before sentencing, arguing that his recent conviction is unjust and unlike any other case in U.S. legal history.

In a motion filed Tuesday (July 29), according to VIBE, Combs’ lawyers told Judge Arun Subramanian that their client should not remain in custody after being convicted on two federal counts of violating the Mann Act. Though the Bad Boy Records founder was found guilty of transporting women across state lines for prostitution, he was acquitted of the more serious racketeering and sex trafficking charges.

“Sean Combs should not be in jail for this conduct,” his legal team wrote. “In fact, he may be the only person currently in a United States jail for being any sort of john, and certainly the only person in jail for hiring adult male escorts for him and his girlfriend, when he did not even have sex with the escort himself.”

The defense emphasized that Combs did not profit from prostitution, did not have sex with any escorts, and did not arrange their travel. According to the filing, testimony during the trial showed that “multiple state courts have held that paying for voyeurism—to watch other people have sex—is not prostitution.”

The court documents further claim that the “freak-offs,” as described in testimony, were consensual and often arranged by the women involved. “Diddy and his defense team make the case for Judge Arun Subramanian changing the Mann Act conviction to an acquittal,” TMZ reported, adding that his attorneys stressed that “none of the sex workers, nor Cassie Ventura or ‘Jane’ testified Diddy engaged in sex with the sex workers.”

In an additional argument, the defense said the conduct may even be protected under the First Amendment, writing that they were “producing amateur pornography for later private viewing.”

Combs’ legal team also offered a detailed bail package, proposing a $50 million bond secured by his Miami home, co-signed by three financially responsible individuals. The defense requested that Combs be allowed to remain at that residence until sentencing, with limited travel only for legal purposes, and that he surrender his passport.

“If released on conditions, Sean Combs will not be violent to anyone,” the motion states. “As we said in court, this jury gave him his life back, and he will not squander his second chance at life, nor would he do anything to further jeopardize his seven children not having a father, and four of his children not having a parent at all. The Court can fashion any set of conditions, and Mr. Combs will abide by any condition, to make the Court comfortable that Mr. Combs will not be violent toward any person.”

Judge Arun Subramanian had previously denied Combs’ release, stating during an earlier exchange with the defense, “You full-throatedly in your closing argument told the jury that there was violence here.”

Further opposing Combs’ release, Cassie Ventura’s legal team submitted a letter urging the court to keep him in custody. “Ms. Ventura believes that Mr. Combs is likely to pose a danger to the victims who testified in this case, including herself, as well as to the community,” the letter read.

Combs has remained in custody since his arrest in September 2024. His sentencing is scheduled for October 3, 2025. If the conviction stands, he could face a maximum of 20 years in prison—10 years for each count.

In a separate legal filing obtained by TMZ, Combs’ lawyers also argued for a full reversal of the Mann Act conviction or, if denied, a new trial. They claim the infamous Intercontinental Hotel video—showing Combs assaulting Ventura—was only admitted due to the racketeering and sex trafficking charges. Since he was acquitted of those, they argue the footage was “unfairly prejudicial” and would not have been admissible if only the Mann Act charges were in question.

For now, Combs’ legal team is focused on securing his release while these issues are under review. The final decision will rest with the court—and could shape not only the remainder of Diddy’s case but how future Mann Act charges are interpreted.