Diddy’s Legal Team Compares Escort To A Restaurant Menu

Paid sex is not the same thing as agreeing to every condition surrounding it. That distinction sits at the center of Clayton Howard’s lawsuit against Sean “Diddy” Combs, and Combs’ attorneys are now attacking it with an unusual comparison as they push to have the case dismissed. In an Oct. 7 filing, Combs and two of his companies reportedly argued that Howard’s years of paid encounters undercut his claims that he was coerced into sexual activity. “Howard is similar to a restaurant, offering choices both on and off the menu,” his lawyers wrote, according to AllHipHop.

The defense argues that Howard, who worked as a male escort, could decide which services he offered and reject requests he did not want to perform. Combs’ attorneys have also accused him of turning to litigation after losing income when the encounters stopped. Howard’s amended complaint draws the line somewhere else. He acknowledges that he accepted money and understood the meetings were sexual. However, he alleges that his consent didn't extend to everything he says happened during them. He claims Combs and others used misrepresentations along with drugs and physical restraint to keep him participating.

One allegation involves a 2016 trip to Miami, where Howard claims his clothes, identification, and phone were taken from him. He says he witnessed Combs assault Cassie Ventura before being ordered into another room, where he allegedly remained for approximately 12 hours.

“Plaintiff’s agreement to attend the Miami encounter did not extend to being deprived of his clothing, identification, and telephone; to witnessing an assault; or to being confined for approximately twelve hours in a room he could not leave,” Howard wrote in the complaint.

The latest filing follows a July ruling that allowed several of Howard’s civil trafficking claims against Combs to continue. U.S. District Judge Anne Hwang dismissed other portions of the case but gave Howard an opportunity to amend them, leading to the current version of his complaint. Combs’ lawyers argue that the revisions still fail to connect the alleged drugs or restraint to sexual acts Howard would not otherwise have performed. They also contend that his own description of a 2015 encounter shows that sexual activity stopped after he became ill.

Cassie is separately asking Hwang to dismiss the claims against her. Her attorneys argue that Howard has not sufficiently alleged that she used force, fraud, or coercion against him. Howard’s latest complaint seeks damages and medical expenses, along with an order preventing harassment or retaliation.

The civil case is separate from Combs’ completed federal criminal trial. A jury acquitted him of sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy while convicting him on two counts of transportation for prostitution. Howard’s allegations were not the sex-trafficking charges decided in that case.

Hwang is scheduled to hear the latest dismissal arguments on Oct. 21. The hearing will put the competing definitions of consent directly before the court, with Combs arguing that Howard could choose from the “menu” and Howard maintaining that agreeing to paid sex never meant surrendering control over everything that happened afterward.