P Diddy Accuses the Government of Colluding to Leak Data, This is the Judge’s Response

Jakarta – The case of P Diddy, also known as Sean Combs, is heating up, but unfortunately, it is not turning out well for the rapper. The accusation that the US government colluded to leak information about his violence case to the media was outright rejected by Judge Arun Subramanian.
According to a report by USA Today, quoted on Wednesday (12/18/2024), P Diddy had previously requested a hearing to prove that the government was behind the leak of the video of his case to CNN. Unfortunately, the judge stated that there was no strong evidence to support that claim. “P Diddy was unable to prove that the government leaked the video to CNN.” He said, ‘The most likely source of the leak is the government,’ but he did not provide a solid basis for this conclusion,” wrote Subramanian.
Judge Subramanian also emphasized that there is no clear evidence showing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as the source of the leaked video. In this case, P Diddy is trying to link the prosecutors to the leak, even though they deny having access to the recording before CNN aired it.
This drama began with the filing in October 2024, when P Diddy’s side accused the U.S. government of deliberately leaking recordings and confidential information to tarnish his reputation in the eyes of the public and potential jurors.
The recording is a video from 2016 at the Intercontinental Hotel, which P Diddy claims damages his image ahead of the trial.
Unfortunately, the judge deemed the accusation too weak. Subramanian stated that P Diddy’s comments were irrelevant because no specific facts from the grand jury proceedings were published.
Although rejecting P Diddy’s claim, Judge Subramanian emphasized the importance of maintaining the confidentiality of the court process. He also emphasized that all parties, including lawyers, investigators, and government agents, must keep non-public information that could disrupt the trial process confidential. “Action will be taken if specific evidence of unauthorized information leaks is found,” Subramanian stated firmly.
The judge also reminded the public not to rush to judgment. He emphasized, “Whether the government can prove Combs’ guilt or not will depend on the evidence presented in court, not in a ‘trial by newspaper.'”