Entertainment
Diddy asks judge to dismiss rape case
Sean”Diddy” To comb has asked a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit alleging that he and two other men drugged and raped a 17-year-old girl at a New York recording studio in 2003. the law, RadarOnline.com has learned.
“Mr. Combs and his companies categorically deny Plaintiff’s decades-old story against them, which has caused incalculable damage to their reputation and business standing before any evidence was presented,” according to the filing obtained by Billboard read.
“Plaintiff cannot claim what day or time of year the alleged incident occurred, but miraculously remembers other salacious details despite her alleged incapacity.”
The complaint, which was originally filed in December and amended in March, comes from an unidentified woman who claimed she was met Harve Pierre, then the president of Combs’ Bad Boy Records, in Detroit. He allegedly flew her to New York on a private jet and took her to a recording studio, where she said she was given drugs and alcohol and raped by Diddy, Pierre and another man.
Although the window that New York’s Adult Survivors Act allowed plaintiffs to file sexual assault complaints after the statute of limitations has expired, this lawsuit was filed under New York City’s Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law, which also deadline for filing complaints is extended. .
On Friday, Diddy’s lawyers argued that “New York state law trumps New York City law without exception,” meaning the lawsuit had to be filed earlier to be timely.
“Plaintiff cannot claim what day or time of year the alleged incident occurred, but claims to miraculously remember the most prurient details with specificity,” the lawyers wrote. “Accordingly, this case must now be dismissed with prejudice to protect the Combs Defendants from further reputational harm and before further party and judicial resources are wasted.”
Diddy’s defense also blasted the complaint for including a “bold, legally irrelevant ‘trigger warning’ intended to draw attention to the salacious and depraved allegations” and claimed that “the sparse changes to the original complaint cover up the falsehoods and incurable flaws in cannot resolve the new complaint. Like the original complaint, it does not contain any viable claim and must be dismissed.”
