'%20x='0'%20y='0'%20height='100%25'%20width='100%25'%20%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20xlink%3Ahref=''%3E%3C/image%3E%3C/svg%3E)
In the latest developments of Jay-Z's s*xual assault allegations, the rapper's lawyer, Alex Spiro, has claimed that the lawsuit against him doesn't qualify for revival owing to a few technical grounds. According to an exclusive report by All Hip Hop dated December 30, 2024, Alex Spiro has now appealed to Judge Analisa Torres to dismiss the case against Jay-Z (originally named Shawn Corey Carter).
Spiro noted a timing issue with the lawsuit as it was filed under the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act (GMV Law). Spiro claimed that "the statute does not have retroactive effect", which means it cannot be applied to incidents taking place before it was enacted.
The GMV Law was enacted on December 19, 2000. However, as per the lawsuit against Carter, the alleged incident occurred three months before in September 2000, and thus cannot fall under the GMV Law.
Trending
The Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act is a legal framework within the New York City Administrative Code designed to protect men and women from gender-based violence. According to the Lipsky Lowe Law Firm:
"The GMVPL creates a civil cause of action for survivors of gender-motivated violence to bring civil lawsuits against their perpetrators and responsible institutions, even if the s*xual abuse occurred decades ago."
The description further states:
"The law covers victims injured by a violent crime motivated by gender: any act or series of acts committed because of a person’s gender. This includes s*xual assaults and other sex crimes classified as a misdemeanor or felony under state or federal law."
Under the GMV Law, plaintiffs can file charges against "perpetrators and entities" who "directed, enabled, participated in, or conspired to commit a gender-motivated act of violence."
The lawsuit in question, filed by an anonymous Jane Doe, accused Jay-Z and his associate, Sean Diddy Combs, of allegedly r*ping and assaulting her after the MTV VMA After Party in 2000. Doe claimed to have been a 13-year-old minor at that time.
Location, revival period and more: Jay-Z's attorney Alex Spiro points out alleged loopholes in Jane Doe's s*xual assault lawsuit
All Hip Hop reported that in his letter to the court, Jay-Z's attorney Alex Spiro noted multiple alleged loopholes in Jane Doe's lawsuit against the rapper and appealed for the court to dismiss it. Apart from the issue with the reported time of the incident, Spiro pointed out an issue with the location of the incident as well.
Spiro noted that the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act is only applicable if the alleged incident took place within the boundaries of New York City. However, Doe's lawsuit does not prove the incident took place within the city. In her lawsuit, Doe claimed that she had attended the 2000 MTV VMAs at Radio City Music Hall, a location in NYC.
However, she also claimed that the incident of assault took place in a second location. According to her complaint obtained by The Mirror, the victim said that she was driven for 20 minutes to a location that had a “large white residence with a gated U-shaped driveway." Jay-Z's attorney pointed out an issue with her claim and stated in his letter:
"Any such residence— to the extent it existed at the time—would have been located outside the territorial boundaries of New York City."
Further, Alex Spiro also argued that the statute of limitations under the Child Victims Act (CVA) prevents the anonymous victim from filing a lawsuit as the alleged incident, if at all occurred, took place over 20 years ago. Under the CVA, a temporary lift on the statute of limitations was put into being to encourage survivors to come forward. However, Jay-Z's lawyer claimed that the period expired in August 2021.
As reported by All Hip Hop, Jane Doe and her attorney, Tony Buzbee, have quoted the GMV Law to revive the case now. However, Jay-Z's lawyer claimed that federal courts have stated that CVA overrules laws like the GMV Law in case of timeline overlaps. Spiro's letter said:
"Plaintiff seeks to plead around this statute of limitations issue by asserting a claim under the GMV Law, which contains a longer revival period. Courts in this District, however, have recognized that the CVA’s revival period preempts the GMV Law’s overlapping and extended one."
Jay-Z's team also demanded that the anonymous Jane Doe's identity be disclosed. However, Judge Torres has upheld the alleged victim's request to keep her identity anonymous. She has also previously dismissed Alex Spiro's appeals to quicken the dismissal process.
Jay-Z and his team have denied all allegations against the rapper in an official statement. The rapper called the allegations "heinous" and urged the anonymous victim to file a criminal complaint instead of a civil one to "lock away" the supposed perpetrators. He also claimed the allegations are a "heartbreak" for his family, mentioning his wife, Beyoncé, and their three children.
