This column discusses sex trafficking. If you or someone you know is in danger or in an unsafe situation,the National Human Trafficking Hotline can help. Advocates are available 24/7 by calling 1-888-373-7888 or texting 233733.

Sean “Diddy” Combs has been found guilty in federal court of violating the Mann Act that involves federal prostitution allegations, but he was acquitted of sex trafficking under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA), the federal government’s primary anti-trafficking law, as well as RICO racketeering charges for the purpose of sex trafficking.

The split verdict has stirred public confusion and outrage. After hearing detailed accounts of coerced sex, drug-fueled “freak-off” parties, surveillance, beatings and emotional manipulation, many believed the case was a clear example of human trafficking. To them, the not-guilty verdict on trafficking charges felt like a miscarriage of justice.

But while the jury held Combs accountable for significant crimes, it stopped short of classifying his conduct as trafficking. We don’t know whether the jurors saw the behavior as trafficking but didn’t find enough evidence – or whether they concluded it didn’t meet the legal definition at all.

What is clear is this: Calling Combs’ behavior trafficking under the TVPA would require expanding that law beyond its current meaning. And that expansion could carry real consequences – especially for the very victims whom trafficking laws were designed to protect.

The 1910

© USA TODAY