Diddy’s Legal Team Claims “Mutual Violence” in Federal Trial
- The New York Editorial Desk - Arif
- 10 minutes ago
- 3 min read
Tone & Political Bias: Weakly Right-Leaning
Why: The framing presents the defense’s perspective in a way that could invite doubt about the accuser’s claims, aligning with a legal strategy often used to challenge narratives of victimhood in high-profile cases.
The Trial Begins
This week, Sean “Diddy” Combs appeared in federal court in New York to face charges of sex trafficking and racketeering. The hip-hop mogul has pleaded not guilty to all charges. The case includes serious allegations from multiple women, including Cassie Ventura, Combs' former longtime partner.
Defense Strategy: Claim of “Mutual Violence”
Combs’ attorney, Marc Agnifilo, told the court the defense would argue that the relationship between Combs and Ventura involved “hitting on both sides,” claiming the violence was mutual.
This approach refers to a concept known as "mutual violence" or "mutual abuse," which suggests both people in a relationship were responsible for abusive behavior.
Legal Experts Push Back
Legal scholars and abuse experts warn that the idea of mutual abuse is not supported as a legal defense:
Laurie Levenson, law professor at Loyola Marymount University, said, “You won’t find in the law books a mutual abuse defense. It’s not okay in criminal law to abuse someone and then say, ‘Well, they’re at fault, too.’”
Bev Gooden, author and advocate for abuse survivors, added that “abuse is about power and control,” not simply about two people acting violently. She emphasized that even if both individuals cause harm, the power dynamic usually reveals who is the abuser and who is responding to trauma.
The Power Imbalance Argument
Gooden also said that when people describe a relationship as mutually abusive, it often overlooks trauma responses. In her words:
“Harm is not abuse. Conflict is not abuse. Abuse is about power and control. It is a pattern, not just messy behavior on both sides.”
According to her, people often lash out as a response to long-term abuse, which may look like aggression but is not the same as intentional abuse.
Attempt to Reframe the Narrative
Professor Levenson believes the “mutual violence” argument is part of a broader strategy by Combs’ defense to suggest the relationship was consensual and possibly part of a sexual dynamic.
She referenced the case of former MLB player Trevor Bauer, who argued that acts of violence were part of consensual sexual behavior. That case was eventually dropped.
“The defense may try to argue that this was just the nature of the relationship – part of a lifestyle, not abuse,” Levenson said.
Gooden responded that consent in kink is clearly defined and enthusiastic. Kink, she explained, must not be confused with abuse, which is based on control, not agreement.
Celebrity Status and Public Perception
The defense may also be relying on the public's reluctance to believe negative accusations against celebrities. Gooden pointed out that people often struggle to reconcile the idea that someone who creates beloved art could be abusive.
“We often have a hard time believing that someone we hold in high esteem could be abusive,” she said. “The same hands that create art can also create terror.”
This line of defense may appeal to Combs’ fans, but legal experts say it does not provide a lawful excuse for abuse if proven.
What’s Next?
The case is ongoing, and the court will assess whether Combs' argument holds legal weight. Experts suggest the focus will likely shift to power dynamics, consent, and whether claims of “mutual violence” can obscure patterns of coercive control.
As testimony continues, both prosecution and defense are expected to dig deeper into the nature of Combs’ past relationships and whether they were abusive, consensual, or a combination of both – all under the scrutiny of federal law.
コメント