Diddy’s Attorneys File Motion Requesting Mistrial In Federal RICO Case

Sean “Diddy” Combs’ defense team has filed their latest motion for a mistrial in his ongoing federal sex trafficking and racketeering case, alleging repeated instances of prosecutorial misconduct.

The motion, filed Saturday (June 7) by attorney Alexandra Shapiro, argues that government prosecutors knowingly presented “demonstrably false” evidence and allowed perjured testimony to be entered into the record.

Central to the new motion is the testimony of Bryana Bongolan, a friend of Combs’ ex, Cassie Ventura, who claimed that Combs assaulted her by holding her over a 17th floor balcony at a Los Angeles hotel in the early morning hours of Sept. 26, 2016.

However, Combs’ defense produced hotel receipts and travel records showing that the music mogul was in New York from Sept. 24 to Sept. 29 of that year.

“The government knew or should have known this testimony was perjured, and that Ms. Bongolan could not possibly have been injured by Mr. Combs on a Los Angeles balcony in the early morning hours of September 26, or even the day before that,” Shapiro wrote in the filing.

Additionally, the motion criticizes the prosecution’s “improper line of questioning” during the testimony of Diddy’s former assistant, identified only as Mia. The defense contends the government’s approach was designed to imply corruption, alleging misconduct on Diddy’s part in obstructing justice.

“It became apparent shortly thereafter, during the questioning of Mia the very next day, that in fact the government’s motive all along must have been to suggest that Mr. Combs had corrupt influence over the LA authorities when it tried to create the impression that he was responsible for the destruction of the fingerprints,” Diddy’s team argued.

This marks at least the third time Combs’ legal team has requested a mistrial in the case. Previous motions alleging judicial bias and inflammatory pretrial publicity were denied by the presiding judge, who ruled at the time that there was insufficient cause to halt the proceedings.

The current motion intensifies scrutiny on the prosecution’s handling of key witnesses and evidence in a trial already laden with public attention and legal complexity. A ruling on the mistrial request is pending.