Jay-Z’s Lawyer Moves to Dismiss P. Diddy Rape Lawsuit Through Legal Technicalities

Jay-Z’s legal team is pushing to dismiss a civil lawsuit filed against him, invoking technical legal arguments as their defense. The lawsuit, brought by an anonymous woman, alleges that Jay-Z and Sean “P. Diddy” Combs assaulted her when she was 13 years old, following the 2000 MTV Video Music Awards. However, Jay-Z’s attorney has argued that the claims are invalid due to several legal loopholes and timing issues.

The accuser, identified only as Jane Doe, filed the lawsuit under the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act (GMV Law). According to her claims, the assault occurred in September 2000. However, Jay-Z’s high-profile attorney, Alex Spiro, contends that the GMV Law does not apply retroactively. This law was enacted on December 19, 2000, three months after the alleged incident, rendering it inapplicable to this case, according to Spiro’s letter to the court.

Spiro further challenged the location of the alleged assault, which is critical to the lawsuit. The GMV Law applies exclusively to incidents within New York City. While Jane Doe stated she attended the 2000 VMAs at Radio City Music Hall in Manhattan, her complaint alleges that the assault took place at a second, unidentified location outside the city.The complaint describes this site as a “large white residence with a gated U-shaped driveway,” located 20 minutes away from the awards venue.Spiro argued that public records from the time indicate that any such property would have been located outside New York City’s jurisdiction, further weakening the applicability of the GMV Law to the case.

Another central argument presented by Jay-Z’s team revolves around the statute of limitations. The alleged incident occurred over two decades ago, which typically would bar the lawsuit from proceeding. While a temporary revival period was enacted to allow survivors of past abuse to file lawsuits despite expired statutes of limitations, that period expired in August 2021.

The plaintiff attempted to file under the GMV Law, which offers a longer revival period for certain claims. However, Spiro argued that the GMV Law’s extended timeline conflicts with the Child Victims Act (CVA), whose revival period has already expired. According to Spiro, courts have ruled that the CVA takes precedence over overlapping statutes like the GMV Law.

Jay-Z issued a public statement vehemently denying the allegations, calling them “heinous” and urging the accuser to pursue criminal charges instead of a civil lawsuit.

 “These allegations are so heinous in nature that I implore you to file a criminal complaint, not a civil one! Whomever would commit such a crime against a minor should be locked away, would you not agree?” Jay-Z stated.

The rapper also expressed frustration over the impact of the allegations on his family, particularly his children. He said, “My only heartbreak is for my family. My wife and I will have to sit our children down, one of whom is at the age where her friends will surely see the press and ask questions about the nature of these claims, and explain the cruelty and greed of people. I mourn yet another loss of innocence.”Sean “P. Diddy” Combs, who is also named in the lawsuit, continues to deny any involvement or wrongdoing.