When Judges Punish for Crimes the Jury Rejected

Sean “Diddy” Combs’s sentencing shines a spotlight on a troubling flaw in federal law—where judges can impose harsher penalties based on allegations a jury has already rejected.
October 10, 2025
Sean Combs

Sean “Diddy” Combs was acquitted of the most serious charges against him—racketeering and sex trafficking—after a grueling federal trial. Yet when he appeared before Judge Arun Subramanian last week for sentencing, those very allegations determined how long he would stay behind bars.

That’s not conjecture; it’s how federal sentencing works.

Under current guidelines, a judge may consider uncharged, unproven, or even acquitted conduct in determining punishment, so long as the allegations are deemed “proven” by a preponderance of the evidence—a far lower standard than “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

It’s one of the strangest paradoxes in modern justice: a jury says “not guilty,” but the judge can still sentence as if the defendant were guilty.

A Legal Loophole Turned Routine

The practice stems from a 1997 Supreme Court case, United States v. Watts, which held that acquitted conduct could be used in sentencing without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause. Congress never corrected it, and prosecutors learned to use it strategically—charge big, accept small, then let sentencing fill in the gaps.

In Combs’s case, prosecutors cited the same allegations of coercion and abuse that the jury explicitly rejected. They argued those accusations showed “pattern and intent,” convincing the court to impose a harsher sentence under the Mann Act.

It’s the legal equivalent of retrying the case after losing—a shadow verdict rendered not by twelve citizens, but by one robed official.

Punishment Without Conviction

This approach corrodes the very logic of the Sixth Amendment. It says a person can be exonerated in the eyes of the law yet punished for what the government believes he did. It erodes the moral authority of verdicts, invites prosecutorial overreach, and undermines public faith in due process.

Combs’s case is hardly unique. Federal inmates from white-collar executives to low-level drug offenders have watched their sentences balloon on the basis of conduct that was never proven or was expressly rejected by a jury.

The only difference here is visibility: because this defendant is famous, the public may finally notice what has long been hidden in plain sight.

The Call for Reform

Several members of Congress, from Senators Dick Durbin to Mike Lee, have introduced bipartisan legislation to ban this practice. The Prohibiting Punishment of Acquitted Conduct Act has languished in committee for years—ignored precisely because it challenges judicial convenience and prosecutorial leverage. With the current climate focusing on the appearances of judicial overreach and weaponization, perhaps this will now be taken more seriously.

If Combs’s sentencing becomes the catalyst for renewed debate, perhaps something good can come from this spectacle. The issue is not whether he deserves mercy or punishment; it’s whether anyone should be punished for conduct a jury refused to convict on.

In a time when faith in justice is collapsing, this simple principle should unite us:
If you’re not guilty, you shouldn’t be sentenced as if you were.

 

Carl Thiese

Carl Thiese is a CPA by academics, who has served as a business consultant at the United Nations and several European embassies. He has studied the growth of the Jewish communities around the world, and consults on management audits for fortune 500 companies. My expertise lies in helping bridge business opportunities with local communities to help governments help people become more self sufficient.
He writes for several media publications about matters exemplifying the need for Justice Reform.

https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/author/carl-thiese/
https://artvoice.com/author/carl-thiese/
https://carlthiese.livejournal.com/

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

CONTACT US

Have you ever aspired to write for the newspaper?
The Reporter is accepting submissions from our readers. News, opinion, sports, interesting hobbies... whatever you want to see published, with your byline on it. Send your copy to news1926@gmail.com. Please include your phone number. We reserve the right to exercise editorial control.

Archives

Contact Us

Email: news1926@gmail.com

Obituaries / In Memoriam: news1926@gmail.com

Publisher and Editor in Chief: Frank Parlato

Reporter Staff

Publisher and Editor in Chief: Frank Parlato

Executive Editor: Tony Farina

 

OWNED BY THE REPORTER INC.

0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x