Diddy is appealing the decision to deny him bail while he awaits trial on sex trafficking and racketeering charges — and his argument to the appeals court says that the government’s accusations of witness tampering are totally wrong.
The mogul’s motion to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, filed on Tuesday (October 8) by prominent appellate attorney Alexandra Shapiro, argues forcefully that Diddy did not attempt to intimidate potential witnesses in his case — one of the main arguments the government made in its successful attempt to deny his proposed $50 million bail package.
AD LOADING...
“The [government’s] proffer provided no basis to believe Mr. Combs had threatened, intimidated, or otherwise attempted to tamper with witnesses and fell far short of demonstrating a ‘serious risk’ of obstruction or witness tampering in the future,” the motion reads.
The government has not yet submitted a response to Shapiro’s motion.
AD LOADING...
Diddy was denied bail for a second time in an appeal hearing on September 18.
Judge Andrew Carter Jr. turned down the request, per TMZ, because “the government has proven the defendant is a danger. The bail package is insufficient even on risk of flight.”
Both sides made arguments in front of Carter, with government lawyer Emily Johnson saying that Diddy had reached out repeatedly to alleged victims, in at least one case attempting to convince the victim that their sexual encounters had been consensual. Johnson focused on the fact that the bail package presented by Diddy’s team didn’t, to her mind, have enough in it to prevent potential obstruction of witnesses.
Diddy’s attorney Marc Agnifilo presented his side afterwards. He promised to have a private investigation firm monitor Diddy’s house, and mentioned, per the previous judge’s concerns about Diddy’s drug abuse and anger issues, that his client has gone through rehab.
AD LOADING...
Diddy’s revised bail package, presented hours before the hearing, offered additional concessions if he was released: no non-family female visitors and weekly drug testing.
The package was slightly modified from the $50,000,000 one his team had proposed — and that a different judge had rejected — a day earlier.
