Jay-Z's Legal Team Claims Allegations Against Rapper Are 'Too Old to Pursue' After He Was Accused of 'Raping a 13-Year-Old Girl' in Disturbing Lawsuit
Jay-Z's lawyer plans to use the calender and geography in hopes of getting his rape case dismissed.
Dec. 31 2024, Published 6:00 p.m. ET
Jay-Z and his lawyer are banking on a legal loophole in their latest attempt to get his rape lawsuit thrown out of court.
RadarOnline.com can reveal the rapper's legal team has claimed the sexual assault lawsuit filed by an anonymous woman, identified only as Jane Doe, who alleged she was just 13 years old when she was raped by Jay-Z and Sean 'Diddy' Combs, is "too old to pursue."
His new tactic comes days after a New York federal judge refused the rapper's motion to identify the woman, who is now 24 years old.
Jay-Z was accused of raping a 13-year-old girl in 2000.
Jay-Z's lawyer, Alex Spiro, wrote a two-page letter to Judge Analisa Torres claiming Doe's claim was too old to be brought to trial.
Spiro wrote: "Plaintiff cannot recover for her sole claim under the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act (the GMV Law), as a matter of law, because the statute does not have retroactive effect.
"Plaintiff asserts a violation of the GMV Law for conduct that purportedly occurred in September 2000. But the GMV Law was not enacted until December 19, 2000, three months after the FAC claims the conduct occurred, and cannot apply retroactively to create a cause of action unavailable to Plaintiff at the time in question."
Jay-Z was named in the lawsuit alongside Sean 'Diddy' Combs.
With the letter, Spiro and Jay-Z, 55, have doubled down on their argument that Doe's ability to file the lawsuit "expired no later than August 2021."
The rapper's attorney referenced a now-dismissed sexual assault lawsuit against Aerosmith singer Steven Tyler in 2023, claiming "any viable GMV Law claim is time-barred under New York's Child Victims Act (CVA), which preempts Plaintiff's GMV Law claim."
Spiro noted the GMV was amended in 2019 with 30 additional months, "the Courts in this District, however, have recognized that the CVA's revival period preempts the GMV Law's overlapping and extended one."
Jay-Z has vehemently denied the allegation and any wrongdoing.
In Spiro's timeline argument, Doe and her lawyer, Tony Buzbee, would be three years late in filing their lawsuit.
Doe's lawsuit alleged the assault took place during one of Comb's alleged "freak offs" after the 2000 MTV Music Awards.
Initially, the lawsuit, which was filed in late October, only named Combs, "Celebrity A” and a “Celebrity B," a female star said to have been present during the attack.
Then, on December 8, Buzbee amended the complaint to name Jay-Z as "Celebrity A."
Jay-Z's lawyer claimed Doe's lawsuit was filed three years too late.
Never Miss an
Daily updates from the heart of Hollywood, right to your inbox
By entering your email and clicking Sign Up, you’re agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Jay-Z has vehemently denied the accusations, writing in a statement: "These allegations are so heinous in nature that I implore you to file a criminal complaint, not a civil one!!"
Days after the complaint was amended, Doe gave a different account of the events she claimed transpired in her lawsuit during a December 13 interview with NBC.
She said: "Honestly, what is the clearest is what happened to me and the route that I took to what happened to me. Not all of the faces there are as clear.
"So I have made some mistakes. I may have made a mistake in identifying."
Some inconsistencies included the musicians listed in the suit being in entirely different locations described by the woman on the night of the incident, based on images from that evening.
