Jay-Z’s Legal Team Moves to Dismiss Rape Lawsuit Over Alleged 2000 Incident

Jay-Z’s legal team is hitting back hard at a rape lawsuit filed against the rap icon.

The lawsuit, brought forward by a woman identified as Jane Doe, accuses Jay-Z and Diddy of sexually assaulting her at an MTV Video Music Awards after-party in 2000. Jay-Z’s attorney, Alex Spiro, is now pushing to have the case dismissed, citing major legal and factual inconsistencies.

Spiro argues in new court documents that the statute under which Jane Doe is suing wasn’t enacted until December 2000—three months after the alleged incident. According to Spiro, this means the statute cannot be applied retroactively against Jay-Z.

Spiro also disputes the location of the alleged assault. Jane Doe claims she was taken from Radio City Music Hall to a “large, white residence with a gated U-shaped driveway” about 20 minutes away. Spiro asserts that any such property, if it existed, would fall outside New York City’s jurisdiction, further challenging the case’s legal basis.

Additionally, Spiro argues that even if the claims were valid, the statute of limitations expired in August 2021, making the lawsuit legally time-barred.

Jane Doe’s attorney, Tony Buzbee, has fired back, telling TMZ, “These are technical arguments being made, and the law is clearly on our side and the side of alleged victims. The law is well settled that we are correct.”

The rapper’s legal team appears determined to see the case dismissed, raising significant questions about its validity and timing.

What do you think about the arguments from both sides? Should cases like these be allowed to proceed despite statute of limitations issues, or do these legal principles matter more? Share your thoughts in the comments below!