Jury selection for Sean Combs’s racketeering and sex-trafficking trial was delayed on Friday over worries that some jurors might get “cold feet” before the start of the high-profile case.
Judge Arun Subramanian, who is overseeing the case, expressed concern that if jurors were selected before the weekend, they could grow uneasy and drop off the panel before the trial begins on Monday. The decision came after one potential juror sent an email to the court asking to be left off the panel for “issues of personal well-being,” the defense said.
Twelve jurors and six alternates will be selected and sworn in on Monday at Federal District Court in Manhattan, ahead of opening statements in the case.
The jury will be tasked with deciding whether the music mogul was a “swinger” with unorthodox sexual proclivities, or a predator who used his power to abuse victims in drug-dazed encounters. If convicted, Mr. Combs, who was once a roundly celebrated figure in the music industry, could spend the rest of his life in prison.
The jurors will be anonymous, meaning their names will not be disclosed in public court. They will not be sequestered, however, so it is up to them to shield themselves from the media coverage and other chatter about the case.
Over three days, dozens of New Yorkers took the witness stand inside the courtroom, where they were asked to describe in detail what they had seen and heard about the case against the artist and executive, who has been the subject of swirling allegations of sexual abuse over the past year and a half.
Mr. Combs, who has vehemently denied the allegations, watched intently as the potential jurors recounted what they had learned on the internet and through word-of-mouth: in news reports, in group text conversations with friends, in speculative chatter between co-workers, on Joe Rogan’s podcast and, in one case, in a satirical song by a Russian comedian.
When questioning a few potential jurors, Judge Subramanian asked about their own social media activity.
“Do you remember retweeting perhaps a meme about Mr. Combs or a joke about Mr. Combs?” the judge asked one man.
“More likely than not, yes,” he replied.
Many of the candidates were adamant that they could set any prior exposure to the case aside to make a decision solely on what is presented at trial.
“I’m old enough to have heard a lot of stories before trial and then when the evidence is actually presented, things are, you know — the truth comes out,” one potential juror said.
Transferred each day from a jail in the Sunset Park neighborhood of Brooklyn, Mr. Combs has worn a crew-neck sweater, slacks and lace-less shoes each day — clothing approved by the judge.
Prosecutors have accused Mr. Combs of using violence and financial manipulation to coerce several women into drug-fueled sex marathons over a period of years. His lawyers have argued that the encounters, sometimes known as “freak-offs,” were entirely consensual, accusing the government of invading Mr. Combs’s private sex life with long-term girlfriends.
His hair gray and his beard trimmed, the defendant nodded at times when potential jurors told stories about their pasts, and he cracked a smile when a candidate noted that he watched the show “American Idol” religiously.
A couple of times, Mr. Combs showed apparent dismay — shaking his head or letting out a sigh — when candidates for the jury disclosed that they had seen footage of him assaulting his former girlfriend, Casandra Ventura, in an incident at the center of the government’s sex-trafficking case.
Many of the potential jurors said they had seen the parts of the footage, which was published by CNN last year. It shows Mr. Combs, wearing only a towel, striking, kicking and dragging Ms. Ventura — the government’s star witness in the case, a singer known as Cassie — near a hotel elevator bank.
One potential juror said in a questionnaire used to screen those who might be selected for the panel that the video “gives the appearance of an angry, hostile person who is entitled.” Another wrote that the assault “could be damning evidence,” though she noted that “of course everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty.” (She was excused from the jury pool.)
Familiarity with the footage was not necessarily disqualifying. Judge Subramanian asked potential jurors who had seen the video if it would cloud their judgment. Did it lead them to form an opinion on Mr. Combs’s guilt or innocence?
“No, it didn’t lead me to form an opinion,” replied one woman who had seen footage of the assault on the evening news. “I was basically just watching it and was taken aback or shocked.”
If a jury candidate betrayed bias — toward Mr. Combs or the prosecution — or seemed unsure whether they could be impartial, the judge struck them from the pool.
One woman was excused after she acknowledged that daily conversations about the case between co-workers may have swayed her view of Mr. Combs. “My bias is, I have two daughters,” she said. “So when we discuss it, I think about my kids.”
Another woman was removed after noting in her questionnaire that Mr. Combs had “a lot of money to use at his discretion” and could “possibly buy his way out of jail.”
The judge also asked potential jurors if they had experiences with law enforcement that might prejudice them against the prosecution? How about sexual assault or domestic abuse?
Several discussed personal accounts of sexual abuse, which were not disqualifying as long as the candidates agreed that those experiences would not color their approach to the case.
Some individuals were cut for health conditions, financial hardship or trouble understanding English. One man admitted it would be difficult to abstain from smoking marijuana over what is expected to be an eight-week trial. Another man said he worked at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, the jail in which Mr. Combs is being held.
And a woman detailed her squeamishness around the discussion of sexual situations, which is expected to be plentiful in a case that revolves around alleged sex trafficking involving male prostitutes. “I could faint or black out,” she told the judge.
As part of the screening process, a list of people who could be mentioned at trial was given to the jury pool see if anyone had conflicts. Some on the list were people known to have accused Mr. Combs of misconduct. Several were major celebrities, sparking online speculation about how those figures might come up in the case.
The jurors picked on Monday will come from a culled list of 43 candidates that passed the initial screening stage.
In recent days, Mr. Combs’s defense team has bulked up to include eight lawyers. The recent additions include Brian Steel, who rose to national prominence by defending the rapper Young Thug in a sprawling racketeering case in Atlanta, and Nicole Westmoreland, who represented another defendant in that case. The government has six prosecutors on its team.
The government’s team became the focus of a dramatic exchange on Tuesday in the judge’s robing room, where Judge Subramanian summoned another lawyer who has represented Mr. Combs, Mark Geragos, though he is not officially a member of the defense team.
According to a transcript of the conversation in the robing room, Judge Subramanian admonished Mr. Geragos for a comment he made in a podcast that he co-hosts with Harvey Levin, a founder of TMZ. During a discussion of the case on the podcast, Mr. Geragos described the prosecution as a “six-pack of white women.”
“I think this is outrageous and this would not be tolerated in any court from any lawyer anywhere across the nation,” Judge Subramanian said. “And I’m going to be watching, and I’m going to be listening. All right? You have one more listener for your podcast.”
Mr. Geragos disagreed that his comment was improper, and told the judge that Mr. Combs is a Black man who “feels like he’s being targeted” by the prosecution. (The government has denied that Mr. Combs is being prosecuted because of his race.)
But Mr. Geragos did not object to the judge tuning in to his show.
“As long as you subscribe, I’m all for it,” he said.
