Still No Verdict on Racketeering: Jury in Diddy’s Trial Divided as Deliberations Stretch Into Day 3

By Trinity Barnette

The jury deciding Sean “Diddy” Combs’ fate is stuck—and it’s not just nerves or pressure. They’ve told the judge, in plain terms, that they cannot agree on Count 1: racketeering conspiracy. According to their note, they’re dealing with “unpersuadable opinions on both sides,” and no one’s budging.

They’ve reached verdicts on the other four charges, which include two counts of sex trafficking and two counts of transporting women for prostitution, but this first charge—the one that ties the entire case together—remains unresolved.

Judge Arun Subramanian acknowledged the tension in the room but opted for patience over pressure. Rather than issuing a formal Allen charge (a courtroom tool used to push deadlocked juries toward consensus), he delivered a softer version: urging them to keep going without abandoning their values or convictions.

“No juror should surrender his or her conscientious beliefs for the purpose of returning a unanimous verdict,” he reminded them.

The jury is now entering Day 3 of deliberations.

Why Count 1 Matters So Much

The racketeering conspiracy charge is the prosecution’s backbone. It’s what allows the government to argue that Diddy didn’t just commit crimes—he ran a criminal enterprise designed to exploit and abuse women under the guise of fame, money, and power.

To convict him under federal racketeering laws, prosecutors had to prove:

• A criminal organization existed

• It impacted interstate commerce

• Combs was part of or connected to that group

• He engaged in a pattern of criminal acts (at least two)

• And he did so knowingly

That’s a heavy lift—and based on how split the jury is, it may be the one charge they just can’t agree on.

If convicted of racketeering, Combs faces life in prison.

Cassie’s Testimony Revisited

Jurors also requested another look at portions of Cassie Ventura’s testimony, including her detailed account of the InterContinental Hotel incident and what she posted online after the release of the surveillance footage. Despite pushback from prosecutors, Judge Subramanian agreed to let them revisit those transcripts in full.

This move suggests at least some jurors are still wrestling with Ventura’s credibility, impact, and how her story fits into the bigger pattern prosecutors are trying to prove.

Why the Allen Charge Didn’t Happen

While prosecutors pushed for an Allen charge—a legal tactic often used when juries are gridlocked—the defense warned it was too soon and potentially coercive. Subramanian agreed, choosing a middle ground: reminding jurors to keep deliberating but not at the cost of their personal beliefs.

An Allen charge is also called a “dynamite charge” for a reason—it’s meant to blow through a deadlock and prevent mistrial. But it walks a fine line between motivation and pressure, especially in high-profile cases like this one.

So far, the judge is holding back.

Clock Is Ticking

There’s also a time crunch. With Fourth of July coming up, the courthouse is closed Friday. If jurors don’t reach a verdict by Thursday, deliberations would have to pause until next Monday—a risky delay in a case this tense.

Both sides said they’re open to having the jury meet on Thursday (even though the courthouse is closed), but that’s only if the panel agrees to come in.

No final schedule has been given yet. Everything depends on what happens in that jury room today.

What Diddy Did in Court Today

In the midst of all this legal tension, the energy in the courtroom shifted to something more personal. Diddy, flanked by marshals, stopped to hug his mother Janice Combs and told her, “It’s gonna be alright.” He said it again later after the court session ended, this time turning to whisper to his six adult children, seated directly behind him in the second row.

For a man accused of orchestrating years of abuse and manipulation, he spent this moment surrounded by family.

Final Thoughts

There are only two paths left: either the jury pushes through and finds common ground on Count 1—or they remain deadlocked, and the judge has to declare a mistrial on the racketeering charge.

That decision, whenever it comes, could define the outcome of this entire case.

And if there’s one thing today made clear, it’s this: the jury knows what’s at stake. But agreement? That’s another story.