Multiple news organizations are asking for access to “freak off” videos that are central to the federal trial involving Sean “Diddy” Combs. According to Variety, major outlets including ABC News, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Associated Press, Vox Media, and Business Insider have filed a joint court motion asking the judge to allow journalists and the public to view the sexually explicit video evidence being shown to the jury.
The footage—reportedly showing graphic and possibly non-consensual sexual activity—is considered by the government to be central to the case. However, the trial is not being televised, and all electronics are barred from the courtroom. That means the public and press currently have no way of independently viewing the evidence.
Media Pushes for Transparency: Why News Organizations Want to See the Videos
The legal filing makes it clear: the press is not asking for copies of the “freak off” videos—only the ability to view them in court as the jury does. Their argument is rooted in the First Amendment right of public access to criminal trials.
In a statement submitted on behalf of the media outlets, attorney Robert D. Balin explained: “News organizations appreciate that some trial exhibits may be sexually explicit and sensitive for alleged victims, but the public and the press should be permitted to view and consider this evidence… consistent with the First Amendment.”
Balin emphasized that the request is not salacious or exploitative, but rather tied to journalistic responsibility and public understanding of the case. He added, “The only way to determine whether the explicit sex acts in the video are consensual or coerced is to actually see them.”
Victims Push Back: Cassie’s Lawyer Says Release Would Violate Privacy
On the other side, attorneys for alleged victim Cassie have pushed back hard. Douglas H. Wignor, representing Cassie, filed a motion asking the court to deny the media’s request, citing privacy violations and potential trauma to victims.
Prosecutors and Diddy’s defense team are also aligned on this point. Both parties support sealing the videos, noting they include nudity and identifiable content involving alleged victims. The argument is centered around balancing press freedom with victim protection, something courts have struggled with for decades—especially in cases involving celebrity, sex, and alleged abuse.