Sean “Diddy” Combs is currently battling to dismiss a disturbing lawsuit against him and his enterprises following allegations of sexual misconduct dating back to 2003.
The legal challenge, lodged by the obscure plaintiff identified only as Jane Doe, accuses Diddy, Bad Boy employee Harve Pierre and an unnamed associate of sex trafficking and gang-raping her when she was 17 years old at his Manhattan recording studio, Daddy’s House.
In her lawsuit, filed in December 2023, Doe alleges that during her traumatic encounter, she was coerced into oral sex by Diddy’s longtime producing partner, Harve Pierre, who also supposedly smoked crack during the incident.
The complaint details how Pierre allegedly transported her from Detroit to New York on a private jet and provided her with drugs and alcohol until she was inebriated and unable to consent.
The filing includes photos purportedly from the night in question, one depicting Doe seated on Combs’ lap, bolstering her claims.
Diddy’s legal team, spearheaded by attorney Jonathan Davis, has put forth multiple arguments for dismissing the accusations, primarily emphasizing that the lawsuit is time-barred.
The alleged incidents occurred in 2003, but the legal action was not initiated until 2023, significantly beyond the statute of limitations.
Davis highlighted in court documents that any assertion to revive the claim under the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law (VGM) should be disregarded as it conflicts with the provisions of the Child Victims Act (CVA) from 2019.
According to Diddy’s defense, the deadline to enact claims under this act expired in August 2021, making Doe’s accusations procedurally invalid.
Moreover, Diddy’s representation contended that the purported behaviors of his colleagues shouldn’t be attributed to him or his companies, asserting that such acts fall outside the realm of employment responsibilities.
Davis further criticized the lawsuit’s narrative technique.
“At the top of Plaintiff’s pleading is a bolded, legally irrelevant ‘trigger warning’ calculated to focus attention on its salacious and depraved allegations. This stunt is intended to prominently showcase a baseless and time-barred claim,” Davis explained.
On his part, Harve Pierre has refuted all the charges against him, describing them as wholly fabricated and motivated by financial interests.
Pierre declared, “This is a tale of fiction. I have never participated in, witnessed, nor heard of anything like this, ever. These disgusting allegations are false and a desperate attempt for financial gain.”
