Jay-Z’s Attorney Argues Anonymous Accuser’s Claims Are Time-Barred

Claims Against Jay-Z And Diddy

Jay-Z's lawyer informed the court that the allegations made by the anonymous accuser against both his client and Diddy were too outdated to be valid.

According to Rolling Stone, attorney Alex Spiro submitted new court documents yesterday (December 30) indicating he intends to contest the claim based on the premise that it cannot be revived under the “lookback window” established to protect victims of gender-based violence in New York. Spiro contended that the GMVA did not become effective until December 19, 2000, which is three months post the alleged incident.

Lawsuit Details

It was revealed on December 8 that Jay-Z, whose real name is Shawn Carter, was implicated in a lawsuit accusing him and Diddy, whose real name is Sean Combs, of raping a 13-year-old girl in 2000.

In a statement disseminated via Rock Nation, Carter denounced the allegations as “disgusting in nature,” labeled them an “attempt at blackmail,” and submitted a letter to the court requesting the lawsuit be dismissed while asserting his innocence. Combs also refuted the allegations made by the accuser.

In Spiro's letter to the court, as reported by Rolling Stone, he stated: “(GMVA) cannot be applied retroactively to create a cause of action not available to the plaintiff at the time in question. A finding to the contrary would violate both state and federal legal standards.”

The letter also references a prior ruling concerning the dismissal of a sexual assault lawsuit against Aerosmith’s Steven Tyler, where former model Jean Bellino accused the singer of assaulting her twice when she was 17. Tyler denied the allegations.

The presiding judge dismissed Bellino’s lawsuit as it attempted to utilize the GMVA revival window for an incident alleged to have taken place in New York City in 1975.

In a ruling last Thursday (December 26), Judge Analisa Torres allowed the woman to pursue her case anonymously after Jay-Z attempted to disclose her identity.

In her ruling, the judge highlighted “quite a number of factors,” emphasizing the “very sensitive and extremely personal” nature of the claim, which justified allowing the Claimant to remain anonymous, at least at this phase of the proceedings.

Carter’s team filed a lawsuit against the accuser’s attorney, Tony Buzbee, for extortion and defamation, asserting that his demand letter provided only a two-week window for a “confidential mediation” involving the alleged victims, who claimed they were drugged and assaulted as minors.

Buzbee characterized the lawsuit as “manifestly without merit,” asserting it “will be dismissed.” Rolling Stone. “I never said a word about him. This is merely another attempt to intimidate and threaten me. It simply won't work.”

This came after Buzbee’s lawsuit against Roc Nation, where he accused the company and its lawyers of employing “shadow agents” and allegedly offering payments to his former clients to unlawfully compel them to file “frivolous” lawsuits against him.

Response from Jay-Z

Roc Nation dismissed the allegations, describing the lawsuit as “nonsense” and a “pathetic attempt to distract and divert attention” from the ongoing case. “Mr. Carter is not one to be intimidated,” his lawyers added, stating: “He filed this lawsuit to pre-emptively label Buzbee a villain.”