Diddy Claims Freak-Off Videos in Federal Case Prove His Innocence, Highlight Consensual Activity

Sean “Diddy” Combs is pushing back against allegations in a federal case, arguing that videos at the centre of the prosecution’s evidence demonstrate consensual activity rather than wrongdoing.

In a letter filed on Tuesday (January 14), Diddy’s legal team asserted that nine videos the government cited as evidence depict “private sexual activity between fully consenting adults in a long-term relationship.” The defence claims the videos show Cassie, identified in the case as Victim-1, appearing “happy, dominant, and completely in control,” and enjoying herself.

Contrary to the prosecution’s claims that the recordings reveal “elaborate and produced sex performances,” Diddy’s attorneys argue the footage shows “adults having consensual sex” and nothing more. They also deny allegations that the tapes were secretly recorded, involved minors, or included other celebrities.

The defence further asserts that the videos were not seized during federal raids, as prosecutors allege, but were instead kept by Cassie herself and later provided to authorities. They claim this undermines the government’s narrative that Diddy retained the tapes as “collateral.”

The letter describes the videos as critical evidence challenging the foundation of the government’s case, which prosecutors previously described as revolving around the so-called “freak-off” activity.

Cassie’s legal team has not commented on the recent filings.

This development follows a December ruling by Judge Arun Subramanian, who denied Diddy’s request for an evidentiary hearing over alleged leaks of case information by government officials. The ruling addressed claims that federal prosecutors leaked a hotel security video purportedly showing Diddy assaulting Cassie in 2016.

In his decision, the judge noted that Diddy’s team failed to provide sufficient evidence to support the accusation that the government was the source of the leak. He also cited private evidence presented by prosecutors, which he said strongly suggested the video did not originate from government sources.

The judge emphasized that Diddy’s guilt or innocence would ultimately be determined at trial based on the evidence, not through public speculation or media narratives.

The case remains ongoing, with Diddy maintaining his innocence and disputing the allegations against him.