Juror vertigo adjourned Day 26 of Sean “Diddy” Combs’ theatrical federal trial in a jolting moment that froze proceedings and held up crucial testimony in a trial that promises to rewrite the history books of music mogul Combs.
The room in the Daniel Patrick Moynihan U.S. Courthouse in New York City was deathly still on June 18, 2025, when word of adjournment on account of a sick juror was announced by U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, who adjourned proceedings until Friday, June 20, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. The adjournment comes at a pivotal moment in the USA v. COMBS (Case Number: 1:24-cr-00542-AS) trial, where Combs is accused of racketeering conspiracy, sex trafficking, and transportation for prostitution, charges which he refutes with great passion.
Before the court cleared out, a brief flurry of legal sparring offered a glimpse into the high-stakes evidence battles unfolding. Prosecutors pushed to admit text messages between Combs’ bodyguard, Damian “D-Roc” Butler, and an alleged drug dealer known as One Stop, arguing the exchanges clearly referenced drug deals. The defense, led by attorney Marc Agnifilo, fired back, insisting there was no foundation for the texts without witness testimony and suggesting One Stop’s number could be a random contact from an address book.
Judge Subramanian, known for his measured rulings, demanded the government produce additional evidence to anchor the messages before he’d allow them into the trial record. The defense also doubled down on an objection to the Rico charge, ensuring their challenge to the indictment’s framework remains a live issue, a move that could prove crucial if the case heads to appeal.
The adjournment robbed prosecutors of a chance to call Brendan Paul, Combs’ former assistant, whose testimony is now slated for Friday. Paul, a 26-year-old ex-Syracuse University basketball player, carries baggage from a March 2024 arrest at Miami-Opa Locka Executive Airport for suspected cocaine and marijuana candy possession, though those charges were dropped in December 2024 after he completed a pretrial diversion program.
A civil lawsuit filed by Rodney “Lil Rod” Jones paints Paul as a key figure in Combs’ orbit, alleging he transported drugs and firearms for the mogul and facilitated payments to sex workers. Paul’s expected 90-minute testimony could either bolster the government’s narrative of a sprawling criminal enterprise or give the defense an opening to poke holes in the prosecution’s case, especially since Paul will testify under an immunity order to shield him from self-incrimination.
The trial, now in its sixth week, has been a rollercoaster of raw testimony and legal drama. Just days ago, on June 17, jurors donned headphones to view explicit videos of Combs’ so-called “freak-offs,” drug-fueled sex parties prosecutors claim he orchestrated and recorded to blackmail victims. The footage, pulled from a laptop provided by Combs’ ex-girlfriend Casandra “Cassie” Ventura, marked a turning point, offering the jury their first extensive look at evidence central to the sex trafficking charges.
Ventura, a star witness, testified for nearly 20 hours over four days, detailing alleged physical abuse and coercion into these performances, breaking down as she said she’d return her $20 million civil settlement to erase those experiences.
Another ex-girlfriend, testifying under the pseudonym “Jane,” spent six days on the stand, recounting a three-year relationship marked by forced sex acts and emotional manipulation. Under cross-examination, defense attorney Teny Geragos used Jane’s own text messages to argue she willingly participated in the “freak-offs,” though Jane insisted her compliance stemmed from Combs’ control. Her testimony also hinted at Combs’ complex psychology, suggesting his voyeuristic tendencies reflected a suppressed curiosity about bisexuality, a claim that sparked heated courtroom exchanges.
The juror’s vertigo isn’t the first hiccup to disrupt the trial. On June 16, Judge Subramanian dismissed Juror No. 6, a Black man from the Bronx, over “lack of candor” after he gave conflicting answers about his residency, potentially making him ineligible for a Manhattan federal jury. The defense cried foul, alleging prosecutors were trying to whittle down the jury’s diversity, but Subramanian dismissed the claim, replacing the juror with an older white man from Westchester. Another juror’s potential misconduct, involving improper discussions about the case, remains unresolved, adding to the trial’s volatility.
A court order filed on June 18 at 11:30 a.m. EDT signals the case is nearing its endgame. The government must prepare a laptop with all non-physical exhibits by June 23, 2025, for defense review, while contraband evidence like drugs or weapons will stay in the courtroom during jury deliberations. Both sides must verify the evidence’s accuracy before closing arguments, a step to avoid last-minute disputes in a trial already fraught with tension.
Whispers about Kristina Khorram, Combs’ chief of staff, have fueled speculation. Prosecutors once hinted she was a co-conspirator, a label the defense fiercely disputes, arguing it’s a government ploy to inflate the Rico charge. Khorram, initially thought to have flipped, won’t testify, and her absence leaves a gap in the narrative about Combs’ inner circle. Text messages between Khorram and assistants, entered as evidence, reveal her coordinating travel and hotel setups for “freak-offs,” including specific requests for Gatorade, chicken noodle soup, and $4,000 in cash, painting a picture of meticulous planning behind the alleged enterprise.
As Friday looms, the prosecution is poised to rest its case, with Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey estimating they’ll wrap by June 20. Planning a brisk two-to-five-day presentation, the defense may call witnesses like Vashta Dunlap, a Bad Boy Entertainment executive, to counter the government’s claims of a criminal network.
With jury deliberations expected next week, the trial’s outcome hangs on whether prosecutors can convince the panel that Combs’ empire was a front for coercion and exploitation, or if the defense can persuade them it was all consensual excess.