What’s next in the federal investigation into Sean "Diddy" Combs and his alleged accomplices

New York () – Sean “Diddy” Combs, who was arrested this week on racketeering and sex trafficking charges, pleaded not guilty Tuesday and was ordered to remain in custody pending his federal trial in New York.

What’s next for the 54-year-old music mogul? And what about the unnamed employees and partners accused of conspiring with him?
Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York who brought the indictment, was ambiguous when asked whether Diddy or others could face additional charges.

“I can’t rule anything out. Anything is possible,” he said. “Our investigation is very active and ongoing, and I think many of those who cover this office know that when we say those things, events are certainly foreseeable, but I can’t predict them sitting here today.”

Several witnesses who worked for Combs have met with prosecutors, a source familiar with the federal investigation told . At least one sex worker is expected to testify before the grand jury in the coming days, according to the source, who added that the witnesses’ allegations go beyond the details of this week’s indictment.

Prosecutors previously said they have interviewed more than 50 victims and witnesses in the case.

spoke to several legal experts to try to understand what lies ahead for Combs and those in his orbit. Experts do not expect a plea deal for the music mogul, and say the allegations against him could expand further.

“I’ll be very curious, especially since he’s being held without bail, to see if that gives other survivors the courage to come forward,” said Shea Rhodes, director of the Villanova Law Institute to Address Commercial Sexual Exploitation.

As for the people who were allegedly part of Combs’ criminal enterprise, experts highlighted difficult questions for prosecutors about whether to charge them or get them to testify against him.

“The prosecution is going to have to deal with witnesses who have a rough past or who admit to engaging in criminal activity,” said trial attorney Misty Marris. “There are a lot of people with dirty hands in a racketeering case.”

Combs’ road ahead began with a series of court decisions made in recent days.

Combs, 54, pleaded not guilty Tuesday to federal charges of racketeering, sex trafficking and transportation for prostitution. The indictment alleges he “abused, threatened and coerced women and others in his entourage to gratify his sexual desires, protect his reputation and conceal his conduct.” It also alleges he formed a criminal enterprise that engaged in “sex trafficking, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, bribery and obstruction of justice.”

He faces up to life in prison if convicted on the racketeering charge. The sex trafficking charge carries a statutory minimum sentence of 15 years.

He will remain in federal custody ahead of trial after his lawyers failed on Wednesday in their appeal against a judge’s decision to deny him bail. In his ruling, Judge Andrew Carter said there were no conditions that would reduce the risk of witness tampering or obstruction.

Combs’ attorney, Marc Agnifilo, told he will appeal the sentence again.

While many federal cases end in plea deals, Agnifilo said that’s not likely between Combs and prosecutors here and said he planned to take the case to trial. “I think he’s innocent of the charges and he’s going to go to trial, and I think he’s going to win,” he told on Tuesday.

Marris said a plea deal is unlikely to be reached, in part because of the mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years on the sex trafficking charge.

“I think what the defense is really saying is, ‘Okay, we’re going to take him to trial because a plea deal is unlikely to be that favorable,’” he said. “We’re talking about charges that carry a minimum of 15 years. The idea that a plea deal is going to be something that carries a mild sentence is not really in the cards in this case.”

In addition, Combs could face additional criminal charges. Prosecutors have said the investigation remains “active and ongoing.” And they have made a public appeal for potential victims to contact authorities.

Rhodes said it would be difficult for victims to come forward in this case, especially given the allegations of violence against those who tried to speak out in the past.

“It’s shame and fear of whether or not you’re going to be believed. (Also) if these allegations about how he had actually implicated his entire organization in covering up what was going on, who isn’t behind bars who can carry out additional intimidation tactics or instill additional fear in survivors who do want to come forward?” she said.

senior legal analyst Elie Honig noted that the racketeering charge is already so broad that it encompasses a range of different types of crimes, including, according to the indictment, “sex trafficking, forced labor, kidnapping, arson, bribery and obstruction of justice.” That said, new victims and witnesses could lead to new charges, he added.

The federal indictment against Combs alleges that he participated in a sprawling conspiracy with staff, aides, supervisors and associates to commit racketeering from 2008 until now.

According to the indictment, the “Combs Enterprise” consisted of Combs, the leader; business entities, including his record label Bad Boy Entertainment; and employees and associates, including security personnel, household staff, personal assistants and high-ranking supervisors.

“Members and associates of the Combs Enterprise engaged and attempted to engage in, among other activities, sex trafficking, forced labor, interstate transportation for the purpose of prostitution, coercion and enticement of prostitution, narcotics crimes, kidnapping, arson, bribery, and obstruction of justice,” the indictment states.

Despite these serious accusations, he is the only one facing charges. Why?

Several legal experts said the lack of charges against those around Combs indicated they may be cooperating with the prosecution.

“There are other people who you could say were his enablers, who the government is not investigating, who are trying to help the government prove its case,” said legal analyst Joey Jackson.

Prosecutors could choose to grant these alleged conspirators immunity or non-prosecution agreements to get them to testify against Combs, Marris said.

“The reason prosecutors would do that is because the target in this case is Diddy,” Marris said. “In order to have a rock-solid case against him, information is necessary and testimony is necessary.”

Furthermore, the lines between victim, witness and offender can be surprisingly blurry. Rhodes calls it “victim-offender overlap” and notes that it is especially pronounced in cases of sexual violence and sex trafficking.

In the Ghislaine Maxwell sex trafficking case, for example, several of the women who testified as victims said they had also recruited others to participate in the sexual encounters.

“Just because a prosecutor can charge someone as a co-conspirator doesn’t mean they should,” Rhodes said. “(Prosecutors) could have charged one of those victims as a recruiting co-conspirator, but that’s not appropriate.”

Were any of Combs’ alleged co-conspirators also victims of other acts of violence? Combs’ indictment indicates as much, stating that one purpose of the criminal enterprise was “to ensure the absolute loyalty of the members of the Combs Enterprise, including through acts of violence and threats.”

The best indicator of what lies ahead for Combs is to examine another recent racketeering case.

Nadia Shihata, a former federal prosecutor who prosecuted the conspiracy case against singer R. Kelly, told there may or may not be other defendants in Combs’ case.

“Certainly, additional people could be charged. It’s also possible that other people have already been charged, have pleaded guilty and are cooperating in the case,” he said. “But just because this is an enterprise-based conspiracy charge doesn’t necessarily mean that more people will be charged.”

For example, in the R. Kelly case — which Shihata acknowledged had some key similarities to Diddy — no one else was charged with that charge. At trial, some of his former employees testified against him, including a general assistant and a road manager. Kelly was ultimately found guilty.

Prosecutors generally have discretion in deciding how wide their network can be cast in conspiracy cases, Honig said.
“You can decide to indict everyone. Or you can decide to target only the key players,” he said. “(You can say:) ‘I’m going to focus my resources and my attention on the bosses, the big shots, and I’m not going to burden this indictment with more peripheral players.’”

– ’s Elizabeth Wagmeister contributed to this report.