Diddy sat still in a Manhattan federal courtroom Tuesday (July 1) afternoon as jurors announced they had reached decisions on four of five criminal charges but remained at odds over the most serious allegation — racketeering conspiracy.

At 4:05 p.m. ET, U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian read a note from the jury stating they had reached unanimous verdicts on Counts 2 through 5 but were split on Count 1.

That charge accuses the Bad Boy Records mogul of running a criminal organization that trafficked women, laundered money and used violence to maintain control — the centerpiece of the federal government’s case.

The judge declined to reveal the jury’s decisions on the four resolved counts, which include two charges of sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion and two counts of transporting women across state lines for prostitution.

Instead, he instructed the panel to continue deliberating on the racketeering charge, hoping to reach a unanimous verdict.

The jury will return Wednesday morning (July 2) to resume discussions. If they remain deadlocked on Count 1, the court could accept the partial verdicts and declare a mistrial on the unresolved charge.

The deliberations have stretched into a second day and have already produced five notes to the judge. One note raised concerns about a juror’s ability to follow legal instructions.

Another note asked for clarification on drug distribution, specifically whether handing over controlled substances at someone’s request constitutes distribution. That inquiry came as jurors reviewed testimony involving alleged drug use and transactions during private encounters described in court.

Jurors also requested transcripts of testimony from Cassie Ventura and Daniel Phillip. Ventura, a former girlfriend of Diddy, testified about a 2016 incident at the InterContinental Hotel in Los Angeles and described events that occurred during a trip to the Cannes Film Festival.

She also detailed so-called “freak offs” involving Phillip, a sex worker allegedly hired by Diddy. Phillip’s testimony included descriptions of encounters at the Essex Hotel. Jurors asked for specific portions of his statements related to those events.

Diddy, who has denied all allegations and pleaded not guilty, faces five federal charges. If convicted on all counts, he could face a minimum of 10 years and up to life in prison.

Deliberations will resume Wednesday morning as jurors attempt to reach a consensus on the racketeering conspiracy charge.

A jury continues to contemplate the fate of Diddy during the second day of deliberations on Tuesday (July 1) in his federal racketeering and sex trafficking case.

Today, jurors zeroed in on drug distribution and disturbing sexual misconduct claims involving Cassie Ventura and a sex worker.

The 12-person panel sent five notes to the judge, including one asking for clarification on whether handing someone drugs at their request constitutes distribution.

That question came after jurors reviewed testimony involving alleged drug use and exchanges tied to Diddy’s inner circle.

Jurors also requested transcripts from Ventura and Daniel Phillip, a sex worker who testified about being hired for so-called “freak offs” — group sex encounters allegedly arranged by Diddy and Ventura.

One note specifically asked for Ventura’s account of a 2016 incident at the InterContinental Hotel in Los Angeles, her time with Diddy at the Cannes Film Festival, and her descriptions of the “freak offs” involving Phillip.

Phillip’s testimony about a separate “freak off” at the Essex Hotel was also flagged for review, signaling the jury’s interest in verifying details of the alleged sex trafficking scheme.

Diddy, who has pleaded not guilty, faces five federal charges: racketeering conspiracy, two counts of sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion, and two counts of transporting individuals for prostitution.

If convicted, the Hip-Hop mogul could face a minimum of 10 years and up to life in prison.

On Monday, the jury deliberated for about five hours. Early in the session, they raised concerns about one juror’s ability to follow legal instructions. The judge responded by reminding the panel of their duty to adhere to the law as instructed.

Later that day, the jury submitted another note seeking legal guidance on the definition of drug distribution, asking whether someone who gives a controlled substance to another person upon request is legally considered a distributor.

The jury’s pointed questions suggest they are dissecting key elements of the prosecution’s case, particularly the alleged use of drugs to facilitate sex trafficking and the credibility of witness accounts.

Deliberations are expected to continue this week, with no timeline yet for a verdict.