Differing Stories Emerge in ‘Puffy’ Combs’ Arrest

NEW YORK —  In most businesses, much less show business, the whole idea is to get people to throw money at you. But New York police say that’s exactly what set off a shootout in a Times Square dance club early Monday that left rap mogul Sean “Puffy” Combs facing felony gun charges.

According to police records, the latest life-imitates-art episode to beset the hip-hop music world was sparked by an expensive act of disrespect--a fellow reveler at the trendy Club New York allegedly tossed “a stack of money” in the face of the 30-year-old Combs, who was partying with his girlfriend, actress-singer Jennifer Lopez.

Jamal Barrow, a 19-year-old rapper signed to Combs’ Bad Boy label and who performed on Combs’ latest album, was charged with allegedly pulling a semiautomatic 9-millimeter handgun and wounding three people in the club. Combs faces two counts of weapon possession, alleging that he too displayed a handgun at the club, then was in a sport utility vehicle where a weapon was discovered after it rushed him and Lopez from the scene, whizzing through several red lights.

At least that’s the police account. Combs’ version, voiced at a Tuesday afternoon news conference here with his combative attorney, Harvey Slovis: “All lies.”

“I do not own a gun nor did I have possession of a gun that night,” said Combs, who performs as Puff Daddy. “I had nothing to do with a shooting in this club.”

So it remains to be seen whether the incident will cost one of the most powerful figures in rap either in the criminal justice system--where one of the charges carries a potential 15-year sentence--or in the corporate music world, where he is counted on to produce multimillion-dollar profits.

The other scenario, one with ample precedent in rap culture and in Combs’ own career, is that witnesses who saw anything may be hard to find, offer murky and contradictory accounts or, with time, suffer from defective memories.

Said Slovis, who earlier this year negotiated a felony assault charge against Combs down to a sentence of one day in an anger-management class: “I’ll bet you later on that nothing will happen to this case.”

The official account is spelled out in criminal charges filed against Combs and three others. New York Police Det. Arthur Caddigan cites unnamed informants at the party at Club New York, who told police that after the money was thrown at Combs, he and Barrow each pulled out semiautomatic pistols. After Barrow allegedly fired several shots, he and Combs fled the club.

Minutes later, Barrow was arrested right outside the club, on 43rd Street just off Times Square. Police said he still had the handgun shown by ballistic tests to have fired two 9-millimeter shells found inside, along with two .40-caliber shells. No weapon has been found to match those.

Meanwhile, Combs and Lopez fled the club with a bodyguard, Anthony “Wolf” Jones, 34, and a driver, Wardel Fenderson, 41, and “jumped into 1/8the back seat of 3/8 a 1999 Lincoln Navigator.”

When a marked police car “attempted to stop 1/8it 3/8 by chasing with lights and sirens, the Lincoln Navigator sped away, going through 11 red lights, until it finally was stopped off 8th Avenue by another marked police car,” the police report said.

Authorities later said the loaded 9-millimeter weapon found on the floor of the front passenger seat, where Jones was sitting, had been reported stolen this summer in Atlanta.

After the shooting, all four occupants of the vehicle were arrested and questioned for several hours, but Lopez--said to be tearful--was released Monday afternoon after the Manhattan district attorney’s office said she would not be prosecuted.

Barrow, who records as Shyne, faces one count of reckless endangerment and three counts of attempted murder, which could bring up to 25 years in prison if he’s convicted. He is due back in court Thursday to learn whether he has been indicted.

While Combs faces the two felony counts, Jones and Fenderson face only one count of criminal possession of a weapon. All three were released on bail and are due back in court Feb. 14 to learn whether a grand jury has indicted them.

The case for the defense was previewed Tuesday afternoon at a Midtown news conference jammed with dozens of camera crews.

Allowing only a brief statement by Combs (“I had nothing to do with a shooting and I think it is terrible that people were hurt”), his attorney then invited questions, only to reject many as foolish or insulting.

Regarding the gun in the car, Slovis testily said: “This is insanity. . . . Shots are fired. He runs to the back seat. There’s a gun in the front seat. How is he to know?”

Combs and one of his associates from Monday’s incident were also present during another shooting, this one in 1995 at a party in Atlanta that resulted in the death of Death Row Records employee Jake Robles. At the time, Death Row owner Marion “Suge” Knight blamed Combs for Robles’ murder. Combs has denied any involvement in the incident. The case remains unsolved.

It is unclear how Combs’ latest brush with the law will affect his future at Bertelsmann Music Group, where he operates a joint venture label with BMG’s Arista division.

Although Bad Boy dominated the nation’s pop charts this month with a second posthumous release from murdered rapper Notorious B.I.G., sources inside BMG privately criticize Combs’ extravagant spending habits and complain about the company’s lack of recent hits. Despite lavish promotional campaigns, Combs’ second solo project performed woefully this year, as have a number of other recent releases on Bad Boy.

In the past, Combs could count on the support of Arista Records founder Clive Davis to protect him from BMG’s disgruntled corporate bosses. But Davis’ power base has been eroded in recent months, and there are questions as to whether he may soon exit the company.

If Combs is convicted of a felony, sources said BMG could cut ties with Bad Boy, claiming a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in his contract. Under that clause, no party to a contract can do anything that will impair the rights of the other party to receive the fruits of the contract.