A lawyer representing Shawn “Jay-Z” Carter has filed a motion in Manhattan federal court insisting that the woman accusing the rapper of raping her when she was 13 must disclose her identity or withdraw her lawsuit entirely.
The lawsuit, initially filed in October by a plaintiff identified only as “Jane Doe,” accused Sean “Diddy” Combs of raping her at a party following the 2000 MTV Video Music Awards. On Sunday, the suit was amended to include allegations that Jay-Z was also present and participated in the assault.
Jay-Z’s attorney, Alex Spiro, argued in Monday’s filing that the plaintiff’s anonymity lacks sufficient justification. “Her vague assertions of potential harm fall far short of the stringent requirements,” Spiro stated. He emphasized that the rapper “deserves to know the identity of the person who is effectively accusing him in sensationalized, publicity-hunting fashion of criminal conduct, demanding massive financial compensation and tarnishing a reputation earned over decades.”
Spiro also noted that Jay-Z has never faced accusations of sexual misconduct and pointed to other lawsuits involving Combs, who is currently awaiting trial for sex trafficking charges. According to Spiro, these cases, including the one brought by Jane Doe’s attorney Tony Buzbee, fail to meet the necessary criteria for plaintiffs to proceed anonymously.
On Sunday, Jay-Z addressed the lawsuit on social media, accusing Buzbee of attempting to blackmail him. He stated that he had filed an anonymous lawsuit against Buzbee for this alleged extortion. “What he had calculated was the nature of these allegations and the public scrutiny would make me want to settle,” Jay-Z wrote, adding, “I will not give you ONE RED PENNY!!”
Buzbee responded publicly, denying Jay-Z’s claims of blackmail and asserting that the demand letter sent to the rapper was on behalf of the alleged victim, who “never demanded a penny” from him. Buzbee further accused Jay-Z of trying to “bully and harass” both him and the plaintiff, promising to “litigate the facts in court, not in the media.”
The case continues to draw public attention as both sides prepare for a contentious legal battle.