Diddy’s Lawyers Believe Public Could Identify Woman Suing Him For Alleged 2003 Gang Rape If Latest Court Documents Aren’t Sealed, Accuser’s Name Not Revealed But Details Said To Be Enough To Expose
Diddy’s legal team is (seemingly) trying to move strategically.
According to legal affairs journalist Meghann Cuniff, Diddy’s attorneys have requested a bolt on their newest brief out of fear of prematurely revealing his sexual assault accuser’s identity.
Diddy
As previously reported, last month, a Jane Doe filed a 14-page suit against Diddy, claiming that the hip-hop mogul gang-raped her in his recording studio in 2003 when she was 17.
The alleged victim also listed Harve Pierre (former president of Bad Boy Records) as one of her three abusers. Additionally, she claimed she was a victim of sex trafficking and given “copious amounts of drugs and alcohol” when recalling alleged details of the supposed incident.
The filing followed singer Cassie’s viral allegations against Diddy, where she also cited similar acts that the 54-year-old (allegedly) committed throughout their decade-plus relationship. Diddy and the ‘Me & U’ phenomenon settled in a matter of approximately 24 hours.
Cassie and Doe’s actions were both taken under the same lawyer, Douglas H. Wigdor.
In response to the latest accusations from Doe, the “Act Bad” artist previously stated on his Instagram,
“LET ME BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR: I DID NOT DO ANY OF THE AWFUL THINGS BEING ALLEGED. I WILL FIGHT FOR MY NAME, MY FAMILY AND FOR THE TRUTH.”
Although Diddy opposed Doe’s demand to remain anonymous, his litigator Jonathan D. Davis is now asking U.S. District Judge Jessica G.L. Clarke to seal the most recent developments in the case.
The motion came about due to Davis’ belief that his brief kicking against Doe’s fight to be publically unknown could expose who she is before the judge’s decision.
While there’s no name in the documents, Diddy’s squad is sure that the details outlined in the paperwork are telling enough.
Davis wrote on behalf of the business tycoon,
“On December 11, 2023, [Doe] moved for entry of an Order permitting her to proceed anonymously as a ‘Jane Doe.’ Although the Combs Defendants are opposing the Motion, they seek to seal Defendants’ Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed Anonymously out of an abundance of caution.”
Diddy
He furthered:
“The Opposition Brief does not reveal Plaintiff’s name, but it does refer to certain facts about Plaintiff that the Combs Defendants have learned because her identity was disclosed by Plaintiff’s counsel. The facts included are pertinent to the Motion, but the Combs Defendants want to disclose them under seal to avoid any possibility that a third party could recognize Plaintiff’s identity before the Motion is decided. Plaintiff has a public-facing identity that could potentially be determined from the content of the Opposition Brief.”
Co-defendant Pierre joined in Diddy’s request through Attorney Scott Leemon.
Following the release of Davis’ letter to the judge, Meghann Cuniff said,
“It’s the lawyers being professional and CYAing over the fact that while their brief doesn’t name her, she’s well known enough that people will be able to figure out who she is from the details they included. They ultimately want her ID’d, but they’re treading lightly before the judge rules.”
Fighting Diddy’s still-standing pushback against Doe’s pseudonym, Doe’s lawyer, Meredith Firetog expressed:
“It is clear that Combs and Pierre’s only defense to these allegations will be to shame our client, cause her to be saddled with unwanted public attention about a horrific event in her youth, and will discourage her from pursuing justice.”
via Meghann Cuniff
What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below!