The judge overseeing the case of a woman who says she was raped by Jay-Z and Sean “Diddy” Combs when she was 13 has criticised the “inappropriate” behaviour of Jay-Z’s lawyer.
In a written order, Judge Analisa Torres hit out at Alex Spiro for what she described as his combative motions and “inflammatory language” against the plaintiff’s lawyer, Tony Buzbee.
Mr Spiro – who has been acting for Jay-Z for around three weeks – previously called for the Alabama woman’s identity to be revealed. She is currently identified only as “Jane Doe”, a US legal term to say she is anonymous.
The Manhattan judge has said she can proceed anonymously at this stage but may be required to reveal her identity at a later date.
Combs remains in a Brooklyn jail awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking and racketeering charges. He has pleaded not guilty.
He is facing a wave of sexual assault lawsuits, many of which were filed by Texas lawyer Mr Buzbee, who says his firm represents more than 150 people, both men and women, alleging sexual abuse and exploitation by Combs.
The lawsuits allege many individuals were abused at parties in New York, California and Florida after being given drugged drinks.
Combs’ lawyers have dismissed Mr Buzbee’s lawsuits as “shameless publicity stunts, designed to extract payments from celebrities who fear having lies spread about them, just as lies have been spread about Mr Combs”.
Jay-Z, whose real name is Sean Carter, previously said in a statement that Mr Buzbee was trying to blackmail him to settle the plaintiff’s allegations.
Mr Buzbee said in an email that his firm does not comment on court rulings.
Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs was named alongside Carter in the lawsuit. Pic: AP
In her lawsuit, the woman claims Jay-Z and Sean Combs raped her when she was 13 after the MTV Video Music Awards in 2000.
Both men strenuously deny the allegations.
Mr Spiro has previously asked the judge to dismiss Jay-Z from the woman’s lawsuit.
Citing an interview the plaintiff did with Sky’s US partner NBC News, Mr Spiro wrote that the broadcast revealed “glaring inconsistencies and outright impossibilities” in the plaintiff’s story.
The woman has admitted inconsistencies, saying she had “made some mistakes”, but standing by her allegations overall.
Judge Torres wrote in her order on Thursday that Mr Spiro had submitted a “litany of letters and motions attempting to impugn the character of Plaintiff’s lawyer, many of them expounding on the purported ‘urgency’ of this case”.
She added: “Carter’s lawyer’s relentless filing of combative motions containing inflammatory language and ad hominem attacks is inappropriate, a waste of judicial resources, and a tactic unlikely to benefit his client. The court will not fast-track the judicial process merely because counsel demands it.”
She said Mr Spiro – who had accused the plaintiff’s lawyer of having a “chronic inability to follow the rules” – had failed to follow the rules himself. She warned him against future “unacceptable” behaviour.
Sky News has contacted Mr Spiro for comment.
Read more:
Former hip-hop dancer speaks out about the industry
What is Sean Combs accused of?
Jay-Z and Beyonce show united front after rape claim
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
There are ‘hundreds’ more
Sean Combs faces fresh lawsuit
Meanwhile, in a new lawsuit filed on 20 December, a woman has accused Combs of drugging and sexually assaulting her in 2006 at a New York party, which she attended after winning a radio station contest.
The woman, who was 23 at the time, said she felt sick and fell unconscious after being served two premade drinks by waitresses, later waking up in hospital with a ripped shirt, missing underwear and shoes, and no recollection of how she got there.
The suit said the woman was left with pain in her vagina for around a week, which she believed was from rough intercourse.
She also said an unknown woman with a New York number later called her, allegedly threatening her to keep quiet.
Combs’ attorney has called the allegations “pure fiction”.
As well as Combs, the woman is also suing Bad Boy Entertainment Holdings, which Combs founded; Atlantic Records, which she said facilitated the event; Mike Savas, a promoter for Atlantic at the time; Delta Airlines, which flew her to New York; KKJamz 105.3, the radio station she said held the contest; and the Roger Smith Hotel, where she stayed.
Ten “John and Jane Does” are also listed as defendants.
The severity cannot be overstated, if an additional 50% tariffs are levied on all Chinese goods it will decimate trade between the world’s two biggest economies.
Remember, 50% would sit on top of what is already on the table: 34% announced last week, 20% announced at the start of US President Donald Trump’s term, and some additional tariffs left over from his first term in office.
In total, it means all Chinese goods would face tariffs of over 100%, some as high as 120%.
It’s a price that makes any trade almost impossible.
China is really the only nation in the world at the moment that is choosing to take a stand.
While others are publicly making concessions and sending delegations to negotiate, China has clearly calculated that not being seen to be bullied is worth the cost that retaliation will bring.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Tariffs: Xi hits back at Trump
The real question, though, is if the US does indeed impose this extra 50% tomorrow, what could or would China do next?
It has said it will “fight to the end”, but what does that mean?
In reality, there are few good options.
There are some obvious measures that China will almost certainly enact.
Follow Trump 100 on your podcast app 
Further export controls on rare earth minerals (crucial for the development of high-tech products) are one example. China controls a huge proportion of the world’s supply, but the US would likely find workarounds in time.
Hiking tariffs on high-impact US products such as agricultural goods is another option, but there is only so far this could go.
The potentially more impactful options have significant drawbacks for Beijing.
It could, for instance, target high-profile American companies such as Apple and Tesla, but this isn’t ideal at a time when China is trying to attract more foreign investment, and some devaluation of the currency is possible, but it would also come with adverse effects.
Other options are more political and come with the risk of escalation beyond the economic arena.
In an opinion piece this morning, the editor of Xinhua, China’s state news agency, speculated that China could cease all cooperation with the US on the war against fentanyl.
Read more from Sky News:
Baby girl becomes first child in UK to be born from womb transplant
March hottest on record in Europe and by some margin
This has been a major political issue for Mr Trump, and it’s hard to see it would not constitute some sort of red line for him.
Other options touted include banning the import of American films, or perhaps calling for the Chinese public to boycott all American products.
Anything like this comes with a sense that the world’s two most powerful superpowers might be teetering on the edge of not just a total economic decoupling, but cultural separation too.
There is understandably serious nervousness about how that could spiral and the precedent it sets.
US
Donald Trump’s 104% tariffs on China – and other levies on ‘worst offenders’ – in effect this mornong
Donald Trump’s trade tariffs on what he calls “the worst offenders” come into effect at 5am UK time, with China facing by far the biggest levy.
The US will hit Chinese imports with 104% tariffs, marking a significant trade escalation between the world’s two largest superpowers.
At a briefing on Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Donald Trump “believes that China wants to make a deal with the US,” before saying: “It was a mistake for China to retaliate.
“When America is punched, he punches back harder.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
White House announces 104% tariff on China
After Mr Trump announced sweeping levies last week – hitting some imported goods from China with 34% tariffs – Beijing officials responded with like-for-like measures.
The US president then piled on an extra 50% levy on China, taking the total to 104% unless it withdrew its retaliatory 34% tariff.
China’s commerce ministry said in turn that it would “fight to the end”, and its foreign ministry accused the US of “economic bullying” and “destabilising” the world’s economies.
‘Worst offender’ tariffs also in effect
Alongside China’s 104% tariff, roughly 60 countries – dubbed by the US president as the “worst offenders” – will also see levies come into effect today.
The EU will be hit with 20% tariffs, while countries like Vietnam and Cambodia see a 46% levy and 49% rate respectively.
The UK was not included on this list, and instead saw a “baseline”, worldwide 10% tariff on imported goods in effect from last Saturday.
At the weekend, Sir Keir Starmer promised the government was ready to “shelter British businesses from the storm”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
What’s going on with the US and China?
Since the tariffs were announced last Wednesday, global stock markets have plummeted, with four days of steep losses for all three of the US’ major indexes.
As trading closed on Tuesday evening, the S&P 500 lost 1.49%, the Nasdaq Composite fell 2.15%, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 0.84%.
According to LSEG data, S&P 500 companies have lost $5.8tn (£4.5tn) in stock market value since last Wednesday, the deepest four-day loss since the benchmark was created in the 1950s.
Global stock markets have been reeling since Trump’s tariff announcement last week. Pic: AP
Read more:
What China could do next as Trump’s tariff war ramps up
Chancellor to hold tariff crisis talks with top City executives
Trump signs coal orders
Meanwhile, the US president signed four executive orders to boost American coal mining and production.
The directives order:
• keeping some coal plants that were set for retirement open;
• directing the interior secretary to “acknowledge the end” of an Obama-era moratorium that paused coal leasing on federal lands;
• requiring federal agencies to rescind policies transitioning the US away from coal production, and;
• directing the Department of Energy and other federal agencies to assess how coal energy can meet rising demand from artificial intelligence.
Read more:
The good, the bad and the ugly in Trump’s coal plans
At a White House ceremony, Mr Trump said the orders end his predecessor Joe Biden’s “war on beautiful clean coal,” and miners “will be put back to work”.
The severity cannot be overstated, if an additional 50% tariffs are levied on all Chinese goods it will decimate trade between the world’s two biggest economies.
Remember, 50% would sit on top of what is already on the table: 34% announced last week, 20% announced at the start of US President Donald Trump’s term, and some additional tariffs left over from his first term in office.
In total, it means all Chinese goods would face tariffs of over 100%, some as high as 120%.
It’s a price that makes any trade almost impossible.
China is really the only nation in the world at the moment that is choosing to take a stand.
While others are publicly making concessions and sending delegations to negotiate, China has clearly calculated that not being seen to be bullied is worth the cost that retaliation will bring.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Tariffs: Xi hits back at Trump
The real question, though, is if the US does indeed impose this extra 50% tomorrow, what could or would China do next?
It has said it will “fight to the end”, but what does that mean?
In reality, there are few good options.
There are some obvious measures that China will almost certainly enact.
Follow Trump 100 on your podcast app
Further export controls on rare earth minerals (crucial for the development of high-tech products) are one example. China controls a huge proportion of the world’s supply, but the US would likely find workarounds in time.
Hiking tariffs on high-impact US products such as agricultural goods is another option, but there is only so far this could go.
The potentially more impactful options have significant drawbacks for Beijing.
It could, for instance, target high-profile American companies such as Apple and Tesla, but this isn’t ideal at a time when China is trying to attract more foreign investment, and some devaluation of the currency is possible, but it would also come with adverse effects.
Other options are more political and come with the risk of escalation beyond the economic arena.
In an opinion piece this morning, the editor of Xinhua, China’s state news agency, speculated that China could cease all cooperation with the US on the war against fentanyl.
Read more from Sky News:
Baby girl becomes first child in UK to be born from womb transplant
March hottest on record in Europe and by some margin
This has been a major political issue for Mr Trump, and it’s hard to see it would not constitute some sort of red line for him.
Other options touted include banning the import of American films, or perhaps calling for the Chinese public to boycott all American products.
Anything like this comes with a sense that the world’s two most powerful superpowers might be teetering on the edge of not just a total economic decoupling, but cultural separation too.
There is understandably serious nervousness about how that could spiral and the precedent it sets.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway