Who's Lying? Diddy's Legal Squad Throws Shade at Each Other Over Trump Pardon Talks

Members of Sean "Diddy" Combs' legal team issued conflicting statements this week about whether they sought a presidential pardon from former President Donald Trump, raising questions about the state of the rapper-producer's defense as he faces sentencing in October.
Marc Agnifilo, who has served as Combs' lead attorney in the criminal case, told CBS News on Wednesday that he "has nothing to do with a possible pardon" and that he had not spoken with the president or anyone who speaks for him about Combs. "I have had conversations with nobody," Agnifilo said.
But Nicole Westmoreland, another lawyer on Combs' team, told CNN on Tuesday that "it's my understanding that we've reached out and had conversations in reference to a pardon," statements that were widely circulated by national news outlets.
The contradictory comments left observers uncertain about whether Combs' legal team has tried to secure clemency from Trump, who has at times said he would consider a pardon for the music executive. Trump told reporters earlier this year he would "certainly look at the facts" if asked and later said in an interview with Newsmax that his relationship with Combs had been mixed, calling him "friendly" at times but "very hostile" when Combs opposed him politically.
Combs, 55, was found guilty last month on two counts of transporting a person across state lines for prostitution in violation of the Mann Act. A jury acquitted him of more serious charges, including sex trafficking and racketeering. Federal prosecutors have recommended a prison term of about 4½ years; under the statutes Combs faces a possible sentence of up to 20 years. Sentencing is scheduled for Oct. 3.
Agnifilo has been a central figure in Combs' defense during the trial, while Westmoreland was named as one of a phalanx of attorneys brought on board during pre-trial proceedings. It was not immediately clear whether the differing accounts reflected a misunderstanding, separate outreach by different members of the team, or a breakdown in communication.
A White House spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment on whether any pardon request on Combs' behalf had been received. A representative for Combs did not respond to messages seeking clarification.
Legal experts said mixed messaging from defense teams can be damaging in high-profile cases because it may create public confusion and complicate negotiation strategies with prosecutors or third parties.
"Consistency matters," said Stephen Gillers, a legal ethics professor at New York University. "When a legal team sends mixed signals about something as consequential as a pardon, it can undercut credibility, both with the public and with other actors involved in potential clemency discussions."
Combs' case drew national attention not only because of his celebrity status but because of the broader legal issues at play. The convictions focused on conduct tied to prostitution and the transportation of people across state lines, while jurors declined to convict on allegations that would have implicated him in organized criminal activity.
As the sentencing date approaches, questions about the legal team's coordination and strategy may intensify, particularly as supporters and critics weigh in publicly. The possibility of a presidential pardon has been raised repeatedly in media coverage and commentaries, though the path to clemency would require outreach and documentation that typically originates with the petitioner or an advocate.
Combs, who once held significant influence in hip-hop and business circles, has largely stayed out of public view since the verdicts. The prosecution's plea to the judge on sentencing emphasized the seriousness of the counts of conviction and urged a custodial sentence, while defense lawyers have argued for a more lenient outcome.
The judge has broad discretion at sentencing and is not bound by the government's recommendation. Until Oct. 3, the question of whether any pardon request was formally pursued — and by whom — is likely to remain a matter of dispute.
© 2025 Enstarz.com All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.