MORE ABOUT DIDDY NEWS:
After providing conflicting responses on his residence, a juror in Sean “Diddy” Combs’ sex trafficking trial has been removed.
On a questionnaire used in jury selection, the juror said he resided in New York’s Bronx. More lately, though, he claimed a court official he had moved in with his fiancée in New Jersey.
Judge Arun Subramanian claimed on Friday that he had discovered “several inconsistencies” between the juror’s responses in court transcripts, which he said would point to a want to “be deceptive” in an attempt to get on the panel.
Saying that Combs would be “substantially prejudiced by the dismissal” of a black man from the jury, lawyers for Combs had objected to the ruling.
An alternate juror—a 57-year-old white Westchester father—has taken the place of the jury.
Not guilty to allegations of sex trafficking, racketeering, and transportation to engage in prostitution, Combs, 55
Lawyers have been talking about the possible firing of the juror throughout last week.
Lead prosecutor Maurene Comey had requested that a juror be sent off for what she called “a lack of candour”.
The prosecution claimed the juror had been staying in New Jersey much of the trial and had lately moved there with his girlfriend.
Video Courtesy: ABC NEWS
The juror claimed he was residing in a flat in the Bronx, New York, throughout the week, for four to five nights, while he was working and serving on jury duty when he was questioned behind closed doors.
But the juror had mentioned earlier, in a prospective juror interview several weeks prior, that he resided in the Bronx with his fiancé and daughter.
The juror had also stated living with an aunt at one point, but she gradually left off mentioning it.
Between the juror’s responses on the court transcripts, the judge declared he had discovered “several inconsistencies”.
The discrepancies, the judge remarked, could indicate a wish to “shade answers” and begged grave doubts on the juror’s “candour” and “ability to follow instructions”.
Six alternate jurors were mentioned by the judge to uphold the court’s “integrity”. The judge added, “removal of the juror is required, in this court’s view.”
Xavier Donaldson, one of Combs’ attorneys, protested to the judge’s predisposition, citing as evidence “very, very common” New Yorkers’ travel between the city and New Jersey.
Saying he thought the court was “equating inconsistencies with lying,”
“I do believe he will be able to follow instructions,” Donaldson added, noting Juror No. 6 has been “awake – I can’t say they all have been awake”.
The principal complaint of the defence regarding the juror’s race was Donaldson’s observation that the jury of the trial was the most varied he had seen in his three-decade tenure.
“That part is important to me and my client,” Donaldson said, stressing that should the court dismiss the juror, it would be “a step backwards.”
“I don’t generally play the race card unless I have it in my hand,” Donaldson remarked.
Should the juror be sacked, Combs’s legal team has asked for a mistrial.
Rejecting the idea that their decisions were motivated on race, federal prosecutors said it was a “wonderful thing” the jury was diverse.
The judge noted the jury in the trial does not generate issues with diversity and added: “The court cannot and should not let race factor into what it should do.”
Monday the judge declared: “There is nothing the juror can say at this point that can put the genie back in the bottle and repair his credibility.”
Along with six alternates, the jury consisted on eight men and four women. Six weeks remain in the study.
This week the prosecution intends to wrap up presenting its case; at that point the defence will have opportunity to call own witnesses.
