Sean 'Diddy' Combs' defense grills accuser 'Jane' about his fetishes
Published in News & Features
NEW YORK — Sean “Diddy” Combs’ defense on Tuesday interrogated a woman he was involved with about her lingering love for the accused sex trafficker — and his fetishes.
The witness, testifying under the pseudonym “Jane,” was in an on-and-off relationship with Combs from around 2021 through his September 2024 arrest. Judge Arun Subramanian has ordered members of the media and public to take caution not to reveal her identity.
Mirroring claims made by Combs’ ex, Casandra “Cassie” Ventura, at the trial’s start, Jane has alleged that throughout her relationship with Combs, he coerced her into degrading sexual performances with other men. The single mom said pushing back on the humiliating sex sessions typically provoked gaslighting behavior from Combs or threats that he would stop paying her rent.
On cross-examination Tuesday, Teny Geragos sought to generate confusion over Jane’s feelings for Combs — past and present — in eliciting answers about her desire to make their relationship work in February 2024 after a break, her commitment continuing after feds raided his properties the following month, and why she participated in unwanted “hotel nights.”
“It’s becoming more and more clear as I’m in therapy,” Jane said.
“You even said two days ago that you love him currently?” the attorney asked a few beats later.
“I do,” the witness said.
Jane said that she felt Combs showing her his dark side was indicative of trust and a willingness to be vulnerable. She said she deeply loved and wanted to satisfy him, not judge, so she “put blinders on.” Later, Jane said that midway through the relationship in 2022, she researched a sexual fetish known as “cuckolding,” in which an individual derives sexual gratification from seeing their partner with someone else. Jane said she remembered thinking, “This is spot-on.”
“He liked to use the words ‘voyeurism’ and ‘escapism,'” she testified. “I would use the word ‘cuck’ for him, more so.”
While acknowledging from the outset that Combs had a propensity for violence against his romantic partners, his attorneys have said he’s not charged with such and have sought to cast his accusers as jealous and driven by financial greed, maintaining he never forced them into sordid sexual performances against their will.
Ventura and Jane both told jurors that outside of male escorts and sex workers, who Combs directed them to sleep with, they were faithful to him while he considered his side of the relationship open. Both said he had threatened to render them homeless several times, and both alleged being subjected to horrific instances of violence.
In graphic detail under questioning by the government on Monday, Jane alleged Combs, 55, savagely assaulted her in June 2024 when she confronted him about sleeping with a young woman in her 20s. She said he forced her to perform oral sex on an escort later that night while she had a swollen head and a black eye. A third accuser who previously testified at the trial under the pseudonym “Mia” alleged Combs raped and sexually assaulted her while she worked for him as an assistant and had been otherwise violent toward her.
On Tuesday, Geragos sought to draw the jury’s attention to Jane’s lingering ties to Combs, such as the incarcerated mogul still paying her rent in addition to her legal fees. Jane didn’t question Geragos’s estimate that Combs had wired her around $150,000 over 3 1/2 years.
“Has Mr. Combs ever attempted to interfere with your attorney’s representation of you?” Geragos asked.
“No,” Jane said.
The Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office has charged Combs with running a criminal enterprise from 2004 until 2024 in which he and his inner circle committed sex trafficking, kidnapping, arson, drug distribution, labor and labor exploitation.
He has pleaded not guilty to sex trafficking, racketeering conspiracy, transporting individuals for prostitution and related offenses.
_____
©2025 New York Daily News. Visit at nydailynews.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Comments