‘Girl, Stop’: P. Diddy’s Texts and Voicemails Exposed During Ex’s Testimony in Sex Trafficking Trial

The high-profile federal trial of Sean “P. Diddy” Combs has taken a dramatic turn as prosecutors exposed a series of text messages and voicemails between the music mogul and his ex-girlfriend, known in court as “Jane.” Jane, the second alleged victim in the indictment, took the stand this week, providing testimony that both bolstered and complicated the prosecution’s case against Combs.

A Mixed Bag for Prosecutors and Defense

Jane’s testimony has proven to be a double-edged sword. On one hand, she offered harrowing details of her relationship with Combs, describing a world of emotional and financial abuse, coercion, and sexual exploitation. On the other, her continued relationship with Combs until just weeks before his arrest, and her own role in arranging some of the so-called “hotel nights,” may give the defense ammunition to question her credibility and the extent of her victimization.

Criminal law attorney and former prosecutor Melba Pearson described Jane’s testimony as a “mixed bag.” While Jane reinforced the “dark aspects of being in Diddy’s world,” she also left room for the defense to argue that she remained in the relationship for the lifestyle it afforded her, rather than purely out of coercion.

Key Testimony: Proving Prostitution and Trafficking

One of the most significant revelations from Jane’s testimony concerns the charge of transportation to engage in prostitution—a serious federal offense. Jane testified that every time she saw Combs between May 2021 and October 2023, it involved a “hotel night,” or what she described as “debauchery nights.” She detailed how Combs or his assistants arranged her travel, paid for male performers, and set up the rooms. Jane even admitted to helping select and pay performers, with money allegedly provided by Combs.

Legal experts argue that this testimony strongly supports the prosecution’s case for the prostitution charge, as it demonstrates a pattern of interstate travel and payment for sex work, regardless of whether force or fraud was involved.

The Coercion Question: Sex Trafficking Allegations

The most controversial charge—sex trafficking—hinges on whether Jane was forced, defrauded, or coerced into commercial sex acts. Jane described how Combs dismissed her requests for safe sex practices, pressured her to participate in prolonged sex sessions, and used financial support as leverage. In one instance, after Jane became physically ill during a session, Combs allegedly told her, “That’s good. You’ll feel better now that you’ve thrown up, so let’s go.”

Jane also testified that she repeatedly told Combs she did not want to continue with the hotel nights, both in person and via text. In response, Combs allegedly belittled and dismissed her concerns, at one point replying simply, “Girl, stop.”

Pearson noted that while the force element may be harder to prove (compared to other victims who described physical violence), Jane’s testimony about financial control, emotional manipulation, and lack of alternatives could establish coercion—a key element for sex trafficking under federal law.

Evidence of Financial and Emotional Control

Jane’s testimony highlighted numerous ways in which Combs allegedly controlled her life: paying her rent, discouraging her from earning her own money, dictating her appearance, and providing drugs for sex sessions. She described feeling “obligated” to participate in these events because of her financial dependence on Combs.

In text messages shown to the jury, Jane complained about feeling used and expressed her desire to stop the hotel nights, only to be reminded by Combs of the roof over her head and the financial support he provided.

Challenges for the Prosecution

Despite the compelling nature of Jane’s testimony, the prosecution faces hurdles. Jane admitted to maintaining a relationship with Combs until shortly before his arrest and even described organizing some of the events herself. She also acknowledged that she sometimes put on a “good show” for Combs, disconnecting emotionally during the acts.

Pearson noted that while Jane vocalized her lack of consent “10 different ways,” her continued participation and the financial benefits she received may be difficult for some jurors to reconcile with the image of a sex trafficking victim. The prosecution may need to recall forensic psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes to explain the complex dynamics of abuse, trauma bonding, and why victims often remain in contact with their abusers.

Racketeering and the Role of Combs’ Organization

Jane’s testimony also touched on the broader racketeering charges, alleging that Combs’ staff and business enterprises were actively involved in arranging travel, paying performers, and supplying drugs. This pattern of systematic abuse and cover-up is central to the government’s racketeering case, which requires proof of at least two underlying crimes.

Conclusion: No Perfect Witnesses, But a Compelling Narrative

As the trial continues, it’s clear that the prosecution’s case is built on a “mixed bag” of witnesses, each with their own strengths and vulnerabilities. Jane may not be the perfect witness, but her testimony paints a disturbing picture of manipulation, coercion, and abuse within Combs’ inner circle.

Whether the jury will find her credible—and whether her testimony is enough to convict Combs on the most serious charges—remains to be seen. As more witnesses take the stand, the nation continues to watch one of the music industry’s most powerful figures face a reckoning unlike any before.

Play video: