Why Diddy may soon be NOT GUILTY on ALL charges

Sean 'Diddy' Combs will one day walk away from his courtroom saga a free man, despite a federal conviction.

That is the startling prediction, in an exclusive interview with Daily Mail, of famed former OJ Simpson defense attorney Alan Dershowitz.

On Wednesday, Combs, 55, was acquitted of the most serious charges - racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking - in a seven-week trial, during which the government alleged that he was the mastermind of a sprawling criminal enterprise that used violence and intimidation in the service of his perverse sexual desires.

Combs, however, was convicted on two counts of transporting individuals across state lines to engage in prostitution.

Now, Alan Dershowitz, legendary civil right lawyer and a member of OJ Simpson's renowned legal 'Dream Team,' says Combs's convictions will likely be overturned on appeal.

'The charges that he's been convicted of will probably be reversed on appeal,' said Dershowitz.

'It's not a crime to transport someone across state lines for voluntary sex,' Dershowitz claimed. 'What he has been found guilty of is based on an anachronistic statute, it's not a real crime.'

Combs was convicted one two counts of The Mann Act, first known as the White-Slave Traffic Act when it was passed in 1910. It is a federal law that prohibits the interstate transportation of individuals for the purpose of prostitution.

Jack Johnson, the first African American world heavyweight boxing champion in American history, was convicted in 1913 under the Mann Act for transporting Belle Schreiber, a white woman, across state lines.

Historians argue that while the Mann Act may have been intended to fight human trafficking, the law was often misused against individuals, particularly black men, for consensual interracial relationships.

In 2018, during his first term, President Donald Trump posthumously pardoned Johnson.

'It's weak,' Dershowitz, said of the Mann Act conviction, 'and it will be reversed on appeal and Combs will walk free. This is really a big victory for him after all this.'

David Gelman, a former state prosecutor, who last week in an exclusive interview with the Daily Mail accurately predicted the Combs's verdict, agreed with Dershowitz's opinion on the convictions.

'It's been my experience in all the jury trials I've had that juries will try to give something to everyone,' said Gelman.

'In this particular case, there was enough evidence to give the government this rinky dink prostitution charge. It's an easy charge, and as these are the only two the prosecution won, the government did a very bad job.'

Combs faces up to 20 years in prison if federal Judge Arun Subramanian hands down the most severe sentence: 10 years for each count.

Gelman expects the sentences would run concurrently and said he would not be surprised if Subramanian gave Combs less than the maximum.

'These aren't serious charges - normally you could just get probation,' said Gelman.

'In federal court though, the guidelines are very different to state and the judge has a lot of leeway. Diddy has done half a year in jail so far; I don't know how much more he will get. He could give probation, and I wouldn't be surprised.'

As to the other charges, Gelman did not mince words: 'In hindsight the government has to look at themselves and see if they should have brought them in the first place.'

'The first count - the racketeering conspiracy - is really hard to prove,' he said. 'It's only really brought in mafia cases.'

'They had to prove that Diddy's company, Bad Boy Records, was a criminal enterprise and carried out criminal activity - transportation for prostitution, guns, drugs and so on - and that Diddy was the leader. That's really hard to do.'

'They didn't have any former employees testifying to that,' he added.

The second charge – two counts of sex trafficking of Cassie Ventura, Combs's ex-girlfriend and another woman only identified as Jane - was defeated because their testimony, according to Gelman, suggested 'consent.'

'One of the male prostitutes said Cassie was directing him what to do and seemed to be enjoying it,' said Gelman. 'She bought plane tickets and booked hotels. She was a willing participant.'

'She testified she did it because she was afraid, but some of her actions do not correspond to that. She said after they broke up, he raped her. Then she said she had sex with him again after the fact. That doesn't mesh, in my view. Her testimony was powerful, but her credibility was lacking.'