In my view, he's guilty alright--of savage domestic violence, sadistic and voyeuristic sexual abuse, of buying and distributing drugs to fuel his orgies--but in a court of law, the jury only found him guilty of two charges of prostitution (transporting human beings for the purpose of prostituting and filming them), but not of (RICO) racketeering and sex trafficking.
Under the law, he may go free very soon. Or not.
I was not in the courtroom nor was I privy to the jury's deliberations, and yet--if this man of the "freak offs" is freed in a few months, no woman, and no male, prostitute is safe. No young and impressionable or merely vulnerable girl or woman, especially a black woman, especially one with hip-hop or rapper ambitions, is safe in this city or in any city where Diddy may land.
Is this decision both a racist and sexist one? Did any juror believe that black women are just "used to" rough sex? That they want to be degraded for days on end? Did even one juror think about the possibility of unconscious biases? Did the prosecution call any experts to testify about such biases?
Perhaps the law has not yet found a way to criminalize serious mental illness or dangerous male sex perversions. Prostitution, whether it is legal or illegal, is a major form of violence against girls and women (and against young boys and men too). It is still not seen as such.
It is still viewed as a man's right--and as a woman's right--to economically survive, at least for as long as she looks "young," and remains "attractive" enough despite the drugs and alcohol that allow her to ply her trade in the plutonium factory.
Maybe the prosecution overreached, and brought the wrong charges. Maybe the defense simply had better arguments. At this point, I do not know and cannot say.
Will Diddy be seen as an even more famous, even more glamorous figure? Will he be viewed as a victim of racism? Will Diddy write a book about his ordeal? Will the jurors cash in as well?
Oh, what about the women--those who dared to testify, who told the truth of how they "went along" with their degradation and humiliation? This is something that most people refuse to comprehend. Victims like these are seen as the guilty ones. Blamed for refusing to walk away from their access to power, and to the high life, blamed and condemned for being "ambitious."
Discussion about this post
No posts
From email:
Hi, Phyllis!
Regarding your views about the women who may be "blamed" for refusing to walk away from power, the high life, and big ambitions--I don't blame them, but that was a choice they made as adults. The law does not protect those who choose to be sexually humiliated and degraded. That's not how the law works.
I feel sorry for these women at the same time as I admire them for speaking out. But the law can't protect them. Maybe they should have settled for a humbler life and maintained their dignity and self-worth.
From email:
Great article!!!