The rapper Sean “Diddy” Combs addressed the court on Tuesday, telling the judge presiding over his sex-trafficking case that he was doing an “excellent” job. The music producer also confirmed that he would not testify in his own defense. After federal prosecutors rested their case, the defense asked the judge to dismiss all charges. 

“Mr. Combs, how are you feeling today?” the district judge, Arun Subramanian, asked the defendant on Tuesday afternoon. 

The former billionaire had risen from his chair to answer the judge. He placed both hands in front of him on the defense table, slightly leaning forward as he spoke. 

“I am doing great. How are you, your honor?” Mr. Combs asked. 

The rapper, who is charged with racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking, and transportation for the purpose of prostitution, pleaded not guilty to all charges and faces life in prison if convicted. 

“Good,” the judge answered, and before he could ask his next question, Mr. Combs quickly added: “I want to tell you, thank you. You’re doing an excellent job.”

“Okay, I appreciate that,” the judge said and, caught off guard, laughed at the compliment the defendant had made him. He then proceeded to ask if the defendant had taken any drugs and if his mind was “clear,” and instructed him on his right to choose to testify or not testify in his trial. Mr. Combs confirmed that he was sober, and had discussed the decision with his attorneys, “thoroughly” as he said. 

“Is it your decision not to testify in this case?” the judge went on. 

“That is solely — solely my decision,” Mr. Combs answered. 

“Solely your decision. Okay. Is there any further questions …,” the judge asked, wanting to move on to the next matter, but Mr. Combs interrupted him. 

“I mean, it’s my decision, but with my lawyers,” the rapper added. 

“All right. Just to clarify, do you understand that it is your decision to make?” Judge Subramanian repeated.  

“Yes, my decision to make. I’m making the decision,” the defendant said, still leaning with his hands on the table. He had taken off the glasses he usually wears as he reads through the evidence alongside his attorneys. 

It appeared that Mr. Combs, who is a performer, wanted to say much more, and that he was using this brief procedural moment to raise his voice after having sat in silence at the defense table for seven weeks. 

The high-profile trial began with jury selection on May 5, and the defendant had listened to more than 30 witnesses testify about the most intimate details of his sex life, his ex-girlfriends, his drug use, and other allegations including numerous incidents of alleged physical abuse. 

His defense attorneys had advised him not to testify in the case that they deemed should be dismissed completely because, according to their argument, prosecutors had failed to meet their burden of proof. 

At 12:30 p.m. federal prosecutors rested their case, but before the defense took the podium to tell the jury their side of the story, defense attorney Alexandra Shapiro filed what’s called a rule 29 motion. 

It is not uncommon that a defense team seeks to dismiss the charges before the case is handed to the jury, but Ms. Shapiro’s arguments were so forceful that the judge reserved his decision to rule on the motion. 

Prosecutors have accused Mr. Combs of running a “criminal enterprise” that orchestrated three- to four-person sex sessions known as “freak offs” — involving Mr. Combs, his girlfriends and one or occasionally two male prostitutes.  

Mr. Combs is charged with racketeering conspiracy. Prosecutors allege he led a criminal enterprise to commit criminal acts over the course of two decades. They have further charged him with two counts of sex trafficking, related to his two former girlfriends, Cassandra Ventura and a woman who testified under the pseudonym Jane, and two counts of transportation for the purpose of prostitution, related to the male prostitutes he hired to have sex with his girlfriends while he filmed the encounters and pleasured himself.  

The key allegation that underlines all charges is that Mr. Combs coerced his girlfriends into having sex with the male prostitutes during the “freak offs.” If the women refused to perform their sexual duties, prosecutors claim, he would use tactics such as violence, blackmail, and kidnapping to force them back into the hotel room — where the “freak offs” usually took place — which, according to the charges, equates to forced sexual labor.  

The defendant also broke the law, prosecutors allege, because he transported male sex workers across state lines, when he paid for plane tickets via his business accounts to fly them to New York or to Miami from Los Angeles.                        

But the defense attorney argued that none of these sex workers, two of whom testified during the trial, had ever described themselves as “prostitutes.” Instead, she said, she called themselves “entertainers” or “escorts,” and said Mr. Combs had merely reimbursed them for their time.      

Furthermore, Ms. Shapiro reminded the court that the forced sex labor laws were passed by Congress to address trafficking situations, in which, for example, “immigrants were duped into brothel work by the promise of green cards.”  

“I respectfully submit, I think, that that’s a very different situation. That’s sort of an elaborate, calculated plan to trick vulnerable individuals into committing commercial sex acts. And that’s very different from the scenario where you’re talking about a boyfriend and girlfriend and it’s a wealthy individual and they have a relationship where he’s paying her rent, they have a romantic relationship,” Ms. Shapiro argued.  

She cited a case that “involved Chinese laborers who came to the United States under very restrictive contracts with the Chinese government that required them to put up all this collateral, and then they had to surrender their passports to the employer. They lived in dormitories. Most of them didn’t speak English. They were in the United States on special visas, so they really couldn’t leave their employer.”  She went on to argue that the women in this case were American citizens, who were free to leave their relationships with Mr. Combs any time they wanted to.

Regarding the racketeering conspiracy, Ms. Shapiro argued that the charge requires the existence of a “criminal enterprise,” which she said prosecutors failed to establish because the alleged co-conspirators, Mr. Combs’s employees, merely facilitated his personal life-style, as is typical for the assistants of the rich and powerful who own their own businesses. 

“They did errands and made travel arrangements, but they did not have anything to do with what went on with Combs and his girlfriends in the hotel room other than they [knew they] used baby oil, Astroglide and drank alcohol and maybe did drugs,” Ms. Shapiro said. 

“The only common link here is Mr. Combs himself, and alleged crimes that the government claims were committed by him related to his personal life and his girlfriend’s. Their sexual activity and other alleged crimes related to their relationships,” Ms. Shapiro went on.

Not only did her client not conspire with his employees, the defense attorney argued, “Combs took steps to conceal the nature of the sexual activity from his employees.” 

She cited several text messages that showed Mr. Combs sought to hide his “freak offs.” In one message that referred to his former chief of staff, Kristina Khorram, also known as KK, he wrote, “I can’t let KK know about the FO,” short for “freak offs.”

Ms. Shapiro also meticulously addressed the criminal acts, which are listed in the racketeering conspiracy, such as the bribery, kidnapping, and arson charges, attempting to dismantle each act by citing witness testimony and evidence shown during the trial. 

The judge reserved his decision to rule on the motion.          

The defense then proceeded with its case. As the Sun reported, the defense decided not to call any witnesses. The presentation of the case lasted about 30 minutes. 

Defense attorney Anna Estevao read into the record several text messages witten between Ms. Ventura, who dated the defendant between 2007 and 2018, and Mr. Combs.  

In one message exchange from around April 2017, Mr. Combs asked Ms. Ventura, what she wanted to do, and she replied, “Be your little freak.” 

In another more elaborate message from 2012, which appeared to have the length of a letter, Ms. Ventura professed her love to Mr. Combs, saying, “I will never have a love like this in my life again.” 

Another defense attorney, Teny Geragos, who is four months pregnant, and for whom Mr. Combs had frequently pulled the chair out during the proceedings, read several stipulations to the jury, regarding statements witnesses had made before the trial, which both the defense and the prosecution had agreed to be true.

In one of these statements, made by a male escort, Daniel Phillip, who testified in the trial, he admitted to prosecutors that he had romantic feelings for Ms. Ventura during the course of their sexual encounters. He also admitted that he did not report to law enforcement an incident of physical abuse he now says he witnessed.

At about 3:30 p.m., the defense rested its case. 

The judge told the jury to return on Thursday, when the attorneys will begin holding their closing arguments, which are expected to last two days. 

On Wednesday, the judge will hold a charging conference with the attorneys to discuss how he will present the charges to the jury. 

Deliberations will most likely begin on Monday.