NEW YORK, United States (AFP) — Jurors on Monday are to begin deliberating whether Sean “Diddy” Combs parlayed his celebrity, wealth and business empire into a decades-long criminal ring that saw him force women into drug-fueled sexual performances with escorts.

The dozen New Yorkers tasked with deciding the music mogul’s future will begin poring over thousands of phone, financial and other records along with the stories of 34 people who testified against him over seven painstaking, and at times excruciating, weeks.

Judge Arun Subramanian on Monday gave final instructions to jurors on how to apply the law to the evidence.

Combs, 55, faces upwards of life in prison if convicted on five federal charges that include racketeering, sex trafficking and transportation for purposes of prostitution.

The producer and entrepreneur, once one of the most powerful people in the music industry, denies the charges.

On Friday his lawyer vied to skewer the credibility of his accusers — namely two women he dated for years — saying they were out for money, while rejecting any notion that he led a criminal ring.

But in their final argument, prosecutors tore into the defence, saying Combs’s team had “contorted the facts endlessly.”

Prosecutor Maurene Comey told jurors that by the time Combs had committed his clearest-cut offenses, “he was so far past the line he couldn’t even see it.”

“In his mind he was untouchable,” she told the court. “The defendant never thought that the women he abused would have the courage to speak out loud what he had done to them.”

“That ends in this courtroom,” she said. “The defendant is not a god.”

Defence attorney Marc Agnifilo scoffed at the picture painted by prosecutors of a violent, domineering man who fostered “a climate of fear.”

Combs is a “self-made, successful Black entrepreneur” who had romantic relationships that were “complicated” but consensual, Agnifilo said.

– Manipulation –
The defence has conceded that Combs at times beat his partners — but insist the domestic violence does not amount to the sex trafficking or racketeering he’s charged with.

Key to the prosecution’s case were witnesses Casandra Ventura and a woman who testified under the pseudonym Jane, both of whom described abuse, threats and coercive sex in wrenching detail.

In their closing arguments the defence dissected their accounts and at times even mocked them, insisting the women were adults making choices that were best for them.

Prosecutor Comey snapped back at that notion, saying the women were “manipulated” into “brazen” acts of sex trafficking.

Ventura and Jane both said they experienced emotional manipulation and threats which made them feel obliged to meet Combs’s sexual demands.

Throughout the trial, jurors were shown voluminous phone records, including messages from both women that Agnifilo argued implied consent.

But prosecutors said those messages do not paint the whole picture, and referenced testimony from a forensic psychologist who explained to jurors how victims become ensnared by abusers.

Central to their case is the claim that Combs led a criminal enterprise of senior employees who “existed to serve his needs” and enforced his power with offenses including forced labor, kidnapping, bribery, witness tampering and arson.

But Agnifilo underscored that none of those individuals testified against Combs, nor were they named as co-conspirators.

Many witnesses were given immunity orders so they could speak without fear of incriminating themselves.

To convict Combs on racketeering, jurors must find that prosecutors showed beyond reasonable doubt that he agreed with people within his organization to commit at least two of the eight crimes forming the racketeering charge.

The eight men and four women must reach a unanimous decision, reaching either a guilty or not guilty verdict on each count.