Trigger Warning: This article contains mention of sexual assault.
The plaintiff in the rape lawsuit against Jay-Z and Sean “Diddy” Combs has been permitted by a New York judge to proceed with the case anonymously. In court documents obtained by The Post, Judge Analisa Torres ruled that “the weight of the factors tips in favor of allowing the plaintiff to remain anonymous, at least for this stage of the litigation.”
She further explained that the court is not obliged to explicitly cover every factor or follow a restricted structure while making decisions, as long as the conclusion balances the interests at stake.
Torres also believes that the alleged victim is “particularly vulnerable to the possible harms of disclosure” because she allegedly continues to struggle with depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and a seizure disorder associated with the stress of her sexual assault.
In October, the plaintiff, who alleged being raped at a 2000 MTV Video Music Awards afterparty when she was 13, named Jay-Z as the other male celebrity who allegedly performed the act alongside Sean “Diddy” Combs.
According to her claims, she was offered a drink at the party and felt “woozy” and “lightheaded” upon consuming it. When she went to her room to lie down, the rappers and longtime friends allegedly entered her room, and Combs reportedly said to her, “You are ready to party!”
Doe claimed that Jay-Z allegedly undressed her and raped her while Diddy and an unidentified female celebrity looked on. Then, the Roc Nation founder allegedly switched positions with Diddy, and the act was repeated.
After the news broke, the Empire State of Mind rapper denied the “heinous” allegations and slammed the woman’s attorney, Tony Buzbee, calling him “deplorable” in a statement. In retaliation for the “cynical and calculated” lawsuit, Jay-Z’s attorney demanded that the accuser be named publicly at the time.
The judge further scolded the rapper and his attorney, Alex Sipro, for “filing combative motions” that contained inappropriate language and ad hominem attacks against the plaintiff, and for opposing her request to pursue her claims as “Jane Doe,” the name she referred to herself as in the filing.
Torres called Spiro’s attempts “a waste of judicial resources and a tactic unlikely to benefit his client,” clarifying that the court will not fast-track the judicial process based on mere demands from counsel.
Disclaimer: If you know someone who is struggling with abuse, please reach out and report about it. There are several helplines available for the same.
