this post was submitted on 08 May 2025

61 points (96.9% liked)

News

38636 readers

16 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

rjc@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

jeffw@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

Judge at Sean 'Diddy' Combs trial scolds lawyer for calling prosecutors 'six pack of white women' (apnews.com)

submitted 1 year ago by HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works to c/news@lemmy.world

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A transcript of a robing room meeting on Tuesday contained the conversation between Judge Arun Subramanian and attorney Mark Geragos.

Later in the day, the judge asked in the robing room meeting if Geragos — whose high-profile clients have included Michael Jackson and the Menendez brothers — was advising Combs “in any way, shape or form?”

Geragos responded that he represents the entertainer’s mother in a matter and has represented Combs and “I do talk with him with great -- with great frequency.” The lawyer’s daughter, Teny Geragos, is a key member of Combs’ legal team.

Then, the judge noted that Geragos had said on a recent “2 Angry Men” podcast he hosts with TMZ founder Mark Levin that the prosecution team was made up of six white women and he had referred to them as a “six-pack of white women.”

top 13 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] ToastedRavioli@midwest.social 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Subramanian then asked Geragos if he knew that was not something that anyone should say “as an officer of the court and a member of the bar.”

Geragos responded: “I think when you’ve got a black man who’s being prosecuted and the client feels like he’s being targeted, it’s a — it’s an observation.”

The judge repeated his point, saying: “I think this is ridiculous. I think referring to the prosecution in this case as a six-pack of white women is outrageous.”

Honestly I think I have a bigger issue with the judge not accepting that as a valid criticism than I do with the lawyer actually saying “six-pack of white women”.

Its 2025, I dont think we need to be pretending that the courtroom is somehow above racial politics. It never has been and it probably never will be, especially the direction things are headed in now.

Im not trying to defend Diddy, and Im sure he likely did a lot of the bad shit hes accused of doing, but that being said: if our legal system has been predicated on race being a point of argument surrounding people’s behavior for the last several hundred years, I think we could give some leeway for a lawyer pointing out the racial politics of having 6 white female prosecutors outside the fucking courtroom

[–] LongMember69@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Im not trying to defend Diddy, but…

Buddy, he stands accused of sexually assaulting over 100 people including drugging and gang-raping children. You don’t need to play devil’s advocate for the defense here.

[–] ech@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

They're not. They're pointing out problems with the legal system as it stands. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Honestly, it's sad that my first thought was, "Oh? They're all women? That's progress!".

[–] LongMember69@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They are.

They’re pretending that Diddy’s defense team’s unsubstantiated innuendo of racial bias is a valid point worth entertaining. It’s not.

It’s a desperate attempt at deflecting that trivializes the real issues in the legal system that you note.

[–] ToastedRavioli@midwest.social -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Literally the judge said “this is not a statement an officer of the court or bar member should be making”. That isnt saying that there are valid times to say it. That is him saying the lawyer said something that should never be said by a lawyer.

You really ought to reconsider, but Im done trying to convince you of anything. You dont seem to want to accept that this has nothing to do with Diddy, other than his case is the reason we are talking about this issue right now.

This judge could have said the same to any lawyer in any case. Would it have been appropriate then? If it wasnt Diddy’s case?

[–] LongMember69@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That is him saying the lawyer said something that should never be said by a lawyer.

Yes. Implying the prosecution is racially motivated with no evidence to support it, doing so by calling them a “six pack of white women” is indeed inappropriate. Add onto that the particulars at play here? I’m with the judge, pretty outrageous.

This judge could have said the same to any lawyer in any case.

Yeah, but they didn’t.

Would it have been appropriate then? If it wasnt Diddy’s case?

Depends on the case.

[+] ToastedRavioli@midwest.social -6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

He stands accused, not convicted, which may not matter to you but it should
Me defending the lawyer’s ability to make comments on the racial politics of the situation really has nothing to do with Diddy in any way, other than that Diddy is a black man and high profile enough for the lawyer to have been talking about the case on a podcast
“Playing the devil’s advocate” doesnt mean whatever you think it means based on how you just used it

To me, this whole thing has nothing to do with Diddy so much as it is about a judge who is uncomfortable with the fact that there are valid criticisms to be had surrounding race and the courts.

Playing the devils advocate would be saying something like “Can Diddy get a fair trial if the prosecution is 6 white women?”. I think he can, but I also think those prosecutors and especially the judge should be cognizant of how the racial politics could impact the trial. To ensure that he gets a fair trial and is rightfully convicted if guilty (as we all anticipate he is)

[–] LongMember69@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

He stands accused, not convicted, which may not matter to you but it should

Correct. By over 100 people, many of whom were minors when they were allegedly sexually abused.

Me defending the lawyer’s ability to make comments on the racial politics of the situation really has nothing to do with Diddy in any way,

I agree with your argument in the abstract, but given the nature of the case I don’t think I’d be choosing to carry water here.

a judge who is uncomfortable with the fact that there are valid criticisms to be had surrounding race and the courts.

Or, have you considered it could be that the judge is familiar with the circumstances of the case, and in this instance finds the defense’s argument unsubstantiated, gross, and totally inappropriate?

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

To me, this whole thing has nothing to do with Diddy so much as it is about a judge who is uncomfortable with the fact that there are valid criticisms to be had surrounding race and the courts.

Here's the thing tho, that lawyer isn't even part of the defense team. He's simply a spectator in the courtroom who happens to be a lawyer and that's what the judge is holding him accountable for, ie: he should know the rules and keep his mouth shut.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 6 points 1 year ago

I genuinely don't understand how the race or gender of the prosecution has any bearing here. We're not talking about a jury, we're talking about the people who are presenting state's evidence in the trial. The prosecution does not decide whether Diddy is innocent or guilty, a jury does. If a jury in the trial of a black man is composed of 12 white women, that could be a real point of issue in our justice system, but the prosecution? It makes no sense

[–] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think we could give some leeway for a lawyer pointing out the racial politics of having 6 white female prosecutors outside the fucking courtroom

If he had said something about 6 white male prosecutors would you have still said the same thing? Probably not.

[–] ToastedRavioli@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago

It would be the same situation, so yea? I dont understand your point. Their gender is irrelevant

[–] toy_boat_toy_boat@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

that was a hard upvote to give tbh. i disgree, but you make a good argument.

that said, my disagreement comes from the perspective of a non-american who isn't knee-deep in the racial weeds that still thrive down there. it sounds like there's a lot more nuance involved.