Tensions are rising in the federal sex-trafficking trial of Sean “Diddy” Combs, as U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian sternly reprimanded high-profile attorney Mark Geragos for inflammatory podcast comments that the judge called “outrageous.”
In a closed-door meeting Tuesday morning, Judge Subramanian criticized Geragos, who is linked to Combs’ defense team, for remarks he made on the TMZ-affiliated podcast 2 Angry Men. Referring to the all-female prosecution team, Geragos said on air: “My understanding is you’ve got a six-pack of white women,” a phrase the judge condemned as inappropriate and potentially prejudicial.
“That’s not — that’s something that you shouldn’t — that no one should be saying as an officer of the Court and a member of the bar,” Judge Subramanian told Geragos, according to a transcript of the robing room meeting.
The reprimand came just as jury selection began in the high-profile criminal case, in which federal prosecutors have accused Combs of sex trafficking, racketeering, and other serious offenses—allegations the music mogul vigorously denies. The trial, taking place in Manhattan federal court, is expected to last up to eight weeks.
Geragos, known for representing celebrities like Michael Jackson and Hunter Biden, has not officially filed an appearance in the Combs case but sat with members of the defense during jury selection this week. He told the court he represents Combs’ mother and speaks with Combs “with great frequency.” However, his exact role remains ambiguous, prompting prosecutors to file a letter Tuesday morning asking the court to stop him from making further public remarks that could influence the jury pool.
On the podcast, Geragos also attempted to downplay a video of Combs allegedly assaulting singer Cassie Ventura in a hotel hallway, saying the incident stemmed from her taking his phone.
“Have you ever had a situation where your significant other took your cellphone?” Geragos asked on-air. “Does that take you from 0 to 60 really quick?”
The judge reminded Geragos that federal court rules prohibit attorneys involved in ongoing cases from making public, extrajudicial statements that could affect the trial’s fairness. “I think referring to the prosecution in this case as ‘a six-pack of white women’ is outrageous,” Subramanian said flatly.
One of the prosecutors, Mary Slavik, emphasized the impact of Geragos’s remarks, noting that the 2 Angry Men podcast has millions of subscribers and that such comments could potentially influence the jury.
“The danger of Mr. Geragos’s statements infecting the jury pool, I think, is very serious,” Slavik said.
In response, Geragos argued that the rule governing public commentary has been “perverted over the years” and interferes with the ability to defend clients in high-profile cases.
He claimed that his observations were tied to concerns about racial bias against Combs, a Black defendant facing an all-white prosecution team.
Nonetheless, Judge Subramanian confirmed he would be monitoring the podcast for future remarks. “You have one more listener for your podcast,” he said pointedly.
Geragos quipped back, “As long as you subscribe, I’m all for it.”
Judge Subramanian’s admonition signals an early warning about courtroom decorum and the consequences of public commentary—especially in cases with national media scrutiny and high stakes for both the defense and prosecution.
