NEW YORK — Federal prosecutors are urging swift dismissal of Sean “Diddy” Combs’ plea to overturn a jury verdict that found him guilty of two prostitution-related charges. The music mogul’s request for a retrial comes after a jury exonerated him in July of more serious charges, including racketeering and sex trafficking, which could have led to hefty prison sentences ranging from 15 years to life.

Documents filed by the prosecution late Wednesday outline claims that Combs orchestrated a series of sexual arrangements involving male escorts for two former girlfriends, spanning from 2008 to last year. These encounters allegedly required the escorts to travel across state lines, in violation of the Mann Act, which regulates interstate commerce related to prostitution.

Despite defense arguments for leniency and bail, prosecutors assert that Combs deserves a significant prison sentence, citing a maximum of 10 years for each Mann Act violation. He has been incarcerated in a federal facility in Brooklyn since his arrest last month in Manhattan. Sentencing is set for October 3.

Prosecutors refuted claims from Combs’ legal team that the Mann Act is overly vague and infringes on due process and First Amendment rights. They contend that the evidence of Combs’ guilt in regards to the Mann Act violations is compelling. The court heard testimony detailing drug-fueled events organized by Combs, where he allegedly directed sexual activities and utilized video recordings to manipulate the participation of his girlfriends, known within the circles as “freak-offs.”

Witness statements from individuals involved highlight the coercive nature of these relationships. R&B artist Casandra “Cassie” Ventura, who dated Combs for a decade, testified that he often demanded weekly meetings with male escorts, which left her drained and hindered her career. Another witness, referred to as “Jane,” shared her experience with similar events, stating they sometimes lasted several days and continued regardless of her well-being.

Both women indicated Combs threatened to release private videos as a means of control. Prosecutors illustrated how Combs exerted significant influence over their lives, detailing how he funded their living expenses and imposed direct threats regarding their compliance.

In contrast, Combs’ defense asserts that the indictments lack foundational elements commonly associated with Mann Act violations, claiming no commercial intent and emphasizing that all participants were consenting adults. His attorneys argued that this case represents consensual behavior unconnected to exploitation.

The legal team characterized Combs’ actions as merely voyeuristic engagement aligned with a “swingers” lifestyle, contesting the framing of the incidents as prostitution. As the legal proceedings unfold, all eyes will remain on the impending sentencing and the implications of this high-profile case on the perception of consent and control in intimate relationships.