Why is Diddy charged under RICO?

05:00 |

Get full access to Reuters.com for just $1/week. Subscribe now.

The Daily Docket

A newsletter by Reuters and Westlaw

By Caitlin Tremblay

Good morning. A busy day awaits. We have a look at the use of RICO in the Diddy trial. Plus, there's a lot going on in Trump litigation today, including two separate hearings over "Liberation Day" tariffs. Plus, the trouble with AI "hallucinations" has spread to big law firms. It's a Mondayest Tuesday. Let's dive in.

Why is Diddy charged under RICO?

REUTERS/Lucas Jackson

The third week of the Sean "Diddy" Combs sex trafficking trial begins today and witnesses have accused the hip-hop mogul of everything from breaking into a rival's home to hurling apples at a woman and attempting to intimidate or pay off witnesses in the case. Combs isn't charged with any of these alleged crimes, but legal experts say they provide powerful fodder for the prosecution's use of RICO. Here's what to know:

RICO became law in 1970 and was aimed at taking down organized crime bosses. It allows prosecutors to introduce evidence of crimes that are not charged in the indictment or even tied directly to the defendant.
The Combs prosecution involves an unusual application of RICO, according to legal experts, who say the law is not typically used in cases that primarily concern things like sex trafficking and prostitution, which Combs is also charged with.
The evidence in Comb's case could paint such a compelling picture that jurors feel comfortable making the leap from trafficking to racketeering. Combs' lawyers have conceded the rapper abused his ex-girlfriend but have argued prosecutors are trying to criminalize consensual sex and his "swingers lifestyle."
There is legal precedent for applying RICO in sexual abuse cases from the case of singer R. Kelly, who argued in an unsuccessful appeal of his 2021 conviction that allegations of assault were unrelated to racketeering.

Jack Queen has more on RICO and what it means for the Diddy case.

Coming up today

The U.S. Supreme Court will issue orders in pending appeals.
U.S. District Judge Matthew Maddox in Baltimore will consider whether to temporarily block the Trump administration from terminating three Democratic members of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.
U.S. District Judge Julia Kobick in Boston will consider whether to certify a nationwide class of transgender and nonbinary Americans adversely impacted by a Trump EO refusing to issue passports that reflect their gender identities. Kobick issued a preliminary injunction last month saying the policy was likely unconstitutional.
Also in Boston federal court, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs will hold a virtual hearing in a lawsuit by Harvard University challenging the Trump administration's move to revoke its ability to enroll foreign students. Burroughs issued a TRO on Friday.
Regarding tariffs, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras will consider toymaker Learning Resources Inc's motion to pause President Trump's "Liberation Day" tariffs as well as the government's motion to transfer the case to the U.S. Court of International Trade, which has already heard two other related cases in recent weeks. In a separate case, California will ask a judge to keep its tariffs case in San Francisco federal court. The Trump administration wants to move that case to the trade court as well.
A preliminary injunction hearing is set before U.S. District Judge Marsha Pechman in Seattle in a case brought by the American Federation of Government Employees seeking to block the Trump administration from ending collective bargaining for nearly 50,000 TSA officers.
Intel and patent owner VLSI Technologies will head back to Texas federal court for a fourth trial in their multi-billion dollar dispute over allegations that Intel's computer chips violate VLSI's patent rights.

Court calendars are subject to last-minute docket changes.

More top news

Industry insight

The problem of AI "hallucinations" is spreading and big law firms aren't immune.
Delaware joined the growing list of states weighing alternative ways to license attorneys. Read more.
More California bar examinees were wrongly told they failed the test. Read more about the latest problem arising from the botched February exam.
Former U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland joined Arnold & Porter. Read more about his new gig.
More moves: Cooley added a new partner to its labor and employment practice in Boston … Clifford Chance hired a partner in its global real estate practice … A partner from DLA Piper joined K&L Gates' asset management and investment funds practice in Milan

$1.1 billion

—That's how much Boeing will pay in fines and compensation to affected families in a deal with the DOJ to avoid prosecution in a fraud case stemming from two fatal 737 MAX plane crashes that killed 346 people. The company must also pay over $455 million to strengthen the company's compliance, safety and quality programs. Read more.

"There's no clear legal authority that permits company-specific tariffs, but the Trump administration may try to shoehorn it under its emergency power authorities."

—Sally Stewart Liang, partner at Akin Gump in D.C., commenting on the potential legal and economic hurdles President Trump could face in his bid to bring back iPhone manufacturing to the U.S. Read more.

Attorney Analysis

Baker McKenzie's Michelle Heisner, Andrii Moskalyk and Yanshu Zhang look at the legal framework around the U.S.-Ukraine mineral deal. Read today's Attorney Analysis.

Additional writing by Shruthi Krishnamurthy.

Contact

Caitlin Tremblay

caitlin.tremblay@thomsonreuters.com

Sponsors are not involved in the creation of newsletters or other Reuters news content. Advertise in this newsletter or on Reuters' website

The Daily Docket is sent 5 days a week. Think your friend or colleague should know about us? Forward this newsletter to them. They can also sign up here.

Want to stop receiving this email? Unsubscribe here. To manage which newsletters you're signed up for, click here.

This email includes limited tracking for Reuters to understand whether you've engaged with its contents. For more information on how we process your personal information and your rights, please see our Privacy Statement.

Terms & Conditions