Sean “Diddy” Combs will not take the stand in his ongoing federal trial, marking a pivotal development in the high-profile case involving the embattled music mogul. The court confirmed this week that the 55-year-old will forgo testifying in his own defense—a move legal experts view as a strategic decision meant to avoid further legal jeopardy.
Combs, who was arrested in September of last year, is facing serious federal charges including sex trafficking, racketeering, and engaging in prostitution. Among the most disturbing allegations are those tied to so-called “Freak Off” parties, which were described in graphic detail by several accusers, including singer Cassie Ventura.
While Combs’ defense team has yet to fully present their case, it is now confirmed that his own testimony will not be included in the final phase of the trial. Legal analysts believe the decision was made to protect him from intense cross-examination and the potential reopening of more than 60 civil lawsuits that remain pending against him.
“It’s risky,” legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told People last month. “Testifying could expose him to a broader legal fallout, especially if his statements conflict with any evidence or testimony already on the record.” The trial, which began on May 12, has drawn national attention and daily media coverage.
Combs has been present at each court session, often accompanied by family members showing visible support. Despite his continued courtroom appearances, the prosecution has painted a damaging picture of the Bad Boy Records founder, alleging a pattern of coercion, manipulation, and abuse spanning years. The allegations and evidence have rattled the music industry and sparked a broader conversation about accountability for high-profile figures.
In a related courtroom development, Judge Arun Subramanian recently dismissed a juror over unclear and inconsistent statements. The decision followed pushback from Combs’ attorneys, who argued that replacing a Black male juror with a white one would compromise the jury’s diversity. However, the judge dismissed the claim, ruling that the change was necessary to maintain the integrity of the trial.
As the proceedings enter their final stages, the absence of Diddy’s own voice from the witness stand adds a layer of uncertainty to the defense’s strategy. Whether this silence will work in his favor or against him remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the outcome of this trial could have lasting implications for both Combs’ legacy and legal future.