Diddy Judge Denies Him New Trial After Mann Act Conviction

Diddy's headed for sentencing in his federal criminal case ... because the judge rejected his request for a new trial and to acquit him of his Mann Act conviction.

Judge Arun Subramanian wrote in his 16-page order there's plenty of evidence proving Diddy violated the Mann Act by transporting male escorts across state lines for the purposes of prostitution during his infamous freak-offs. Diddy's freak-offs were marathon sex sessions between his girlfriends and male escorts, with Diddy watching and often recording them.

In the order, the judge said Diddy was right when he argued in his motions for acquittal and a new trial that "the Mann Act’s text and application have changed over the last century."

But, Subramanian says, Diddy's argument has little relevance to his conduct, which sits at the heartland of the Act’s legitimate proscriptions." The judge adds, "Unsurprisingly then, his conviction raises no constitutional problem."

Subramanian said Diddy's motions also challenged the definition of prostitution, even though the judge used his definition in the jury instructions at trial.

The judge says, "The correct definition of prostitution in the Mann Act is sex in exchange for money or its equivalent. And that definition poses no constitutional problem."

Furthermore, Diddy said a new trial should be granted because his RICO and sex trafficking counts should not have been joined together with the Mann Act counts.

But, Subramanian says that because the jury was able to distinguish between the counts, a new trial isn't warranted.