O.T.I.S.
Veteran
With male prostitutes that he wasn’t fukking?
Baby oil is illegal to you? That deserves 11 years right
Prosecutors pushing for Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs to spend at least 11 years in prison
- Thread starter Doobie Doo
- Start date
Baby oil is illegal to you? That deserves 11 years right
the artist known az
Hail the victors
I don't know if he'll get 11, but it might be around half that. I know people are like "he only got convicted of prostitution", but the problem is the Judge HEARD the other stuff. Beating on Cassie and 50's BM, the drugs, breaking into Kid Cudis crib, torching his car, extorting Cassies parents (even tho he gave it back), threatening her with releasing sex tapes, holding some chick over a balcony, an alleged rape of Cassie, etc. These things influence Judges and are the reasons they give higher than usual sentences. Puff could be sitting for some years
Yes they do if they deviate from what the guidelines suggest. And this judge can just read my post you quoted to satisfy that and finish it with the Cassie beating video. He wouldn't have to though to give him half of what the prosecutors are requesting. Guidelines are suggesting 5.8 to 7.25 years
All of your comments until I said no one knows what the judge is going to do....
2 Up 2 Down
Veteran
Life hits you hard
He also said the violence is being allowed to deny him bond due his defense admission in the opening and closing statements but only what he’s been convicted of can weigh on his sentencing. It remains to be seen.
I'm laughing because in every trial I have been involved in either Voir Dire or opening statements this is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what we tell the jury. Uhhh, actually sir, testimony IS evidence. Evidence is not just something you can touch, or look at on a video screen. When a witness testifies everything they say from the stand is evidence. You do realize that there are people in jail who are in there from testimony alone right?
Also dude, that is NOT the definition of hearsay. Hearsay is an out of court statement offered in court to try to prove the truth of the matter asserted. It is considered unreliable because it is not coming from the person who originally made the statement, but rather someone else who is just repeating what they heard somebody else say. For example, I am testifying on the stand and I say "CodeBlameVI said he saw Puff punch Cassie in the face". Now I didn't see it, I'm just repeating what I heard YOU say you saw. Hearsay is usually inadmissible, although there are exceptions.
Yeah, the Judge can say he believes whatever he wants. He can't sentence Puff for RICO or sex trafficking, but he can use that evidence that he saw and heard to influence his decision on what he gives him. You think that video of Puff kickin Cassies azz is not going to influence his decision??? And no he wasn't convicted of beating her but it is evidence that came out during the trial. He may believe Puff did try to burn up Cudis car and hold that against him. Go read the judges decision on Puffs last attempt at getting a bond. He's telling you point blank in it about what he believes Puff did and it was not stuff he was convicted of.
Yagirlcheatinonus
Icon Poster
Na it’s a bigger play they can’t let him out because the Keefe D trial coming up. They about to throw the book at dude.
He’s cooked, that judge has it for him
Your point is? Second one says he MIGHT get half. Third says IF he deviates from the guidelines. The last one came after you said he would have to explain his reasoning. And I responded by saying yes he would, and his reasoning would be the things I listed. Show me where I said the judge is definitely gonna give him a lot of time. Trying to figure out why you took the time to quote all those posts and none of it proves your point
Ezekiel 25:17
Veteran
You just said it, prostitutes. Did he pay the prostitutes?
O.T.I.S.
Veteran
Go back and read what they said.. did he?
And youre avoiding my question, that deserves 11 years to you?
Nigerianwonder
Superstar
This was predictable. The judge is completely biased. However I read the whole doc and there is a bit of a silver lining for puff. The judge frequently mentions that the court must respect the jury decision as a reasons not to throw out the mann act convictions and that they the jury found him innocent of the rico and sex trafficking. With that logic he may then be more inclined to adhere and stick to the sentencing guidelines for what he was convicted of (1 to 2 years) for a first time offender to respect the jury decision.
richaveli83
Veteran
He shouldn't do more than 3-4 years. He's a woman beater, but Cassie wasn't no damsel in distress either. 
