In my view, the Government's submission borders on disingenuous. If not that, at least wishful thinking. It twists and turns itself into a pretzel as it tries to turn a Mann Act violation into a crime in which the two named victims are victims in one scenario and perpetrators in another. It morphs a Mann Act charge into a crime of violence by ignoring the legislative history of a big amendment to the statute and then dregs up details from the charged acts of racketeering to show Combs would be a danger if released on bond, when the jury never had to render a verdict on whether any acts of racketeering had been proven once it concluded the Government failed to meet its burden of proof on the RICO conspiracy.

The reason I uploaded both parties' submissions on bond is that they also include each side's preliminary calculations as to the sentencing guideline range for Combs. They are quite different. The defense thinks Diddy's guidelines are 15 to 21 months (of which he's already served 10 in pretrial detention) while the Government, in pretzel mode again, tries to throw the book at him by adding on various guideline enhancements to arrive at range of 57 to 71 months. You can read the defense view of what's wrong with the Government's approach in its Reply to the Government's motion.

I'll wait before weighing in on the guideline calculations, but as to bond, given that risk of flight was not an issue (and Combs was ordered detained pending trial only on grounds of dangerousness), I think the far lesser penalties he is now facing, his acquittal on the RICO conspiracy and sex trafficking charges, and the ability to put him on home detention at his mansion on the uber-exclusive, gated community of Star Island, and a restriction on his visitors to his immediate family, lawyers and business advisors, would be sufficient to minimize, if not eliminate, any risk of him harming another person or the community before sentencing.