nsfs

The woman who accused Jay-Z and Sean “Diddy” Combs of drugging and raping her when she was 13 years old can remain anonymous for now, a judge ruled Thursday (Dec. 26), citing the “highly sensitive” nature of her accusations.

According to court documents obtained by Billboard, Judge Annalisa Torres wrote that “the weight of the factors” in the case “tips in favor of allowing Plaintiff to remain anonymous” for now. In justifying the decision, the judge cited the Jane Doe’s assertion that she continues to suffer from depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and other health effects due to the alleged rape, as well as a claim by the woman’s attorneys that Combs has threatened other alleged victims who have filed suits against him for speaking out. However, the judge acknowledges that “because the balance of these factors will certainly shift” as the case moves forward, she plans to revisit the question of anonymity at a later date.

Also in Thursday’s ruling, the judge turned down a request by Jay-Z’s legal team to fast-track a hearing on their motion to dismiss the case against him and criticized the rap mogul’s lawyer, Alex Spiro, for his “relentless filing of combative motions containing inflammatory language and ad hominem attacks” against the plaintiff’s attorney, Tony Buzbee, calling them “inappropriate, a waste of judicial resources, and a tactic unlikely to benefit his client.” The motion to expedite the hearing was tied to a Dec. 13 NBC News interview in which the Jane Doe admitted to inconsistencies and “mistakes” in her narrative of the alleged assault and was contradicted by her own father.

In the woman’s complaint, filed earlier this month, she accused Combs and Jay-Z (born Shawn Carter) of drugging and sexually assaulting her following an MTV Video Music Awards after-party in 2000. The case was an updated version of a previous complaint the woman had filed against Combs alone.

Since the updated case including Carter was filed on Dec. 8, the rap mogul and his attorneys have forcefully denied the allegations, with Carter calling the lawsuit a “blackmail attempt” and characterizing Buzbee as a “fraud” with an aim “to exploit people for personal gain.” Buzbee has filed a host of lawsuits against Combs over the last several months and has said he represents dozens more victims who have yet to file their own complaints.

In a statement sent to Billboard in response to Thursday’s court ruling, Buzbee said that “the coordinated and desperate efforts to attack me as counsel for alleged victims are falling flat.”

An attorney for Carter did not immediately respond to Billboard‘s request for comment.

The latest decision in the case comes as part of a mounting legal war between Jay-Z and Buzbee. On Dec. 18, Buzbee filed a lawsuit against Jay-Z’s company, Roc Nation, and its attorneys (including Marcy Croft and law firm Quinn Emanuel) accusing them of “engaging shadowy operatives” to derail his case against the rapper, including by allegedly offering money to one of his former clients (Gerardo Garcia) to convince him to file bogus lawsuits against his firm — an incident Buzbee claims was caught on tape. “Defendants have conspired to obstruct justice by engaging shadowy operatives to illegally seek out more than two dozen current and former clients of The Buzbee Law Firm to convince those clients to bring frivolous cases against [the firm],” Buzbee wrote.

In response, a Roc Nation spokesperson called Buzbee’s lawsuit “nothing but another sham” and “a pathetic attempt to distract and deflect attention,” while Croft reacted by calling the allegations in the lawsuit “false” and “a desperate attempt to distract from his mounting legal woes.”

Buzbee’s Dec. 18 lawsuit is actually the second he’s filed against Carter’s attorneys over the past month. The first, filed earlier in December, accused Quinn Emanuel of retaliatory behavior, including alleged harassment of Buzbee’s colleagues, clients and family. That came in response to a lawsuit Jay-Z secretly filed against Buzbee in November in which the rapper accused the Texas attorney of spearheading an effort to extract settlements from innocent celebrities after threatening to link them to Combs.

A federal judge says Sean “Diddy” Combs can’t prove that prosecutors leaked the infamous 2016 surveillance video of him assaulting his former girlfriend Cassie – and is refusing to launch an investigation into his claims that the government is waging a “campaign” of such leaks.

In an order issued Monday, Judge Arun Subramanian denied Combs’ request for discovery and an evidentiary hearing into those allegations. Combs had argued that prosecutors were using media coverage to “taint the jury pool” and deprive him of a fair trial.

Most notably, the judge said that Combs had failed to show that government agents leaked the Cassie video, saying the accused mogul “doesn’t point to any sound basis for this conclusion.”

“Combs never considers the possibility that many people beyond Victim-1 and government agents likely had access to the video, including Combs’s team (who paid security officers at the Intercontinental Hotel “$100,000 in cash to destroy” the video) and hotel employees and contractors,” the judge wrote.

Though he denied the request from Combs’ legal team, the judge also reiterated previous warnings to prosecutors to closely safeguard grand jury materials and avoid sharing other improper information with the press.

“The court is sensitive to Combs’s concern about the publication of stories claiming to disclose inside information about this case from unnamed ‘federal law enforcement sources who are involved in the investigation,’” the judge wrote.

“The court has already taken steps in this regard, and it is open to tailored applications for relief as this case continues,” the judge added. “The court once again reminds the government and its agents that if specific information comes to light showing that they leaked prohibited information, action will be taken.”

Combs was indicted in September, charged with running a sprawling criminal operation aimed at satisfying his need for “sexual gratification.” The case centers on elaborate “freak off” parties in which Combs and others would allegedly ply victims with drugs and then coerce them into having sex, as well as on alleged acts of violence to keep victims silent.

A trial is currently set to start on May 5. If convicted on all of the charges, Combs faces a potential life prison sentence.

The star’s legal team has spent months seeking to have him released on bail until the start of the trial. But after multiple failed attempts, his attorneys on Friday dropped their appeal of the bail issue, meaning the hip-hop mogul will remain behind bars at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn until the trial kicks off.

In October, Combs’ attorneys warned the judge that there had been “a series of unlawful government leaks” in the case, leading to “damaging, highly prejudicial pre-trial publicity that can only taint the jury pool and deprive Mr. Combs of his right to a fair trial.”

The filing called the Cassie video – a clip that made headlines when CNN first aired in May — the “most egregious example” of such leaks, arguing it had been done in order to “mortally wound the reputation and the prospect of Sean Combs successfully defending himself.”

“Rather than using the videotape as trial evidence, alongside other evidence that gives it context and meaning, the agents misused it in the most prejudicial and damaging way possible,” Diddy’s lawyers wrote at the time. “The government knew what it had: a frankly deplorable video recording of Sean Combs in a towel hitting, kicking and dragging a woman in full view of a camera in the hallway of the hotel.”

In a response weeks later, the government sharply denied those claims – and accused Combs’ lawyers of using such allegations as a ploy to “suppress a damning piece of evidence.”

“Without any factual basis, the leak motion seeks to suppress highly probative evidence … by claiming that it was grand jury material leaked by government agents,” prosecutors write. “But, as the defendant is fully aware, the video was not in the Government’s possession at the time of CNN’s publication and the Government has never, at any point, obtained the video through grand jury process.”