Law&Crime Sidebar - Explosive Lawsuit Claims Shannon Sharpe Raped Woman He Met at Gym

Episode Date: April 21, 2025

Controversial civil attorney Tony Buzbee is targeting another prominent male celebrity with a lawsuit. This time, former NFL superstar Shannon Sharpe is named as the defendant. The $50 million lawsuit, filed on behalf of Jane Doe, claims Sharpe was abusive and manipulative and raped her on at least two occasions. Law&Crime’s Jesse Weber goes over details from the lawsuit with civil attorney John Clune, who specializes in sexual assault cases.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:Cybercrime is becoming more dangerous daily. Don’t wait until it’s too late—protect your business with Apollo Networks’ top-tier cybersecurity solutions today. Get a free network health assessment and 50% off your first month! https://www.apollonetworks.com/sidebarHOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger, Christina O'Shea & Jay CruzScript Writing & Producing - Savannah Williamson & Juliana BattagliaGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller that will

keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. This just in, the Texas attorney who targeted Sean Diddy Combs with dozens of civil lawsuits on behalf of John and Jane Doe's allegedly victimized by the music mogul, has a new target in sites. NFL legend Shannon Sharp. A brand new lawsuit was just filed in Nevada claiming Sharp was manipulative and abusive and eventually sexually assaulted a Jane Doe with the latest claims allegedly happening as recently as January. We got our hands on the filing and we're going to break down everything you need to know. Welcome to Sidebar presented by law and crime. I'm

Jesse Weber. Tony Busby's back. The lawyer who went after Sean Combs, Jay-Z, we'll talk about that. Well, he is still swinging at high-profile men that he claims are abusers. This time he's calling out Shannon Sharp, the 56-year-old NFL superstar turned podcaster and commentator. Brand-new lawsuit filed against Shannon Sharp. We got a copy of it right here. It was filed out in Nevada. We're going to go over it. But Shannon Sharp, in because you don't know who he is, he played 14 seasons in the NFL with the Denver Broncos, the Baltimore Ravens. He was inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 2011. After he retired, he spent time as a sports commentator and analyst.

You might remember that he co-hosted. Skip and Shannon, undisputed with Skip Bayliss from 2016 to 2023. Bayliss, and his that employer, by the way, Fox Sports, they face their own accusations of sexual misconduct and a separate filing from earlier this year. We covered it here on Sidebar as well. Now, Sharp is part of the sports podcast space. He hosts two shows, Club Sheshay and Nightcap.

In fact, you remember his interview with comedian Kat Williams in January 2024 on Club Shay-Shay that helped spark, I should say, a renewed interest in Sean Diddy Combs and his alleged bad behavior at his infamous parties. Got a lot of people talking. Now, I've had to turn down $50 million four times, four times, just to protect my integrity and that I was telling you about. Right, because P. Diddy be wanting the body. And you got to tell him no. You've got to tell him no. I did. I did.

But now it's Shannon Sharp, who's in the spotlight for his own accusations of abuse. Because on Monday morning, Texas attorney Tony Busby announced on his Instagram that he'd filed a $50 million lawsuit in Nevada court against Sharp. On Instagram, he wrote in part, I'm extremely proud to represent Jane Doe. It takes a great deal of courage to stand up against those with power. fame and money. I look forward to pressing this case in court. So we're going to go over this, but I want to first bring in John Clune, civil attorney, who litigates on behalf of survivors of sexual abuse and sexual assault. John, so good to have you. And again, this is kind of breaking news. I didn't have an opportunity to fully go through this lawsuit. So you

and I are going to break this down in basically real time. When we saw this early this morning, it was a shock to us. What was your initial reaction? You know, my initial reaction was the timing of it, to be honest. Before I read the lawsuit, just the timing of it for it to be filed, you know, on Easter Sunday, that struck me as an unusual move. But then as I went through the lawsuit, the allegations are, you know, pretty disturbing. We don't know if they're true or not, but what's written in the complaint is pretty terrible stuff. John, I have to say to go after Shannon Sharp, if you're Tony Busby, after what happened,

what just happened with Jay-Z? Remember, he filed that lawsuit on behalf of a Jane Doe, a woman who claimed that she was 13 years old back in 2000 and was sexually assaulted by Jay-Z. That lawsuit was dropped, and it came after serious questions of her story and credibility surfaced, both by reporting by NBC News and evidence that was presented by Jay-Z side. Hezzi ended up suing this woman, suing Tony Busby as well. So now to go after Shannon Sharp, another high-profile figure, does that tell you that he feels he has the evidence in this case?

Well, you know, Mr. Busby is a pretty bold mover in this space. I mean, he seems to not be, you know, shy about his decision-making. So it could mean that he's got the goods in this particular case or it could just be, you know, kind of part for the course, and this is how he, you know, handles his high-profile cases. But you know, and me and I know, you can't just file a frivolous lawsuit. You can't file a lawsuit to harass somebody. You have to believe the law, the facts, there's, you know,

there has to be some semblance of facts that you put forward in a complaint that pass an motion to dismiss test. So he has to feel that he might not have all the evidence right now, But he has to feel confident in Jane Doe's account, right? Otherwise, he'd be breaking ethics rules. Yeah, and, you know, the thing with these accounts, like in a sexual assault, just a Jane Doe against an individual, is it's really hard to get rid of that case on a motion to dismiss or even down the road on a motion for summary judgment, because if you have your client who's saying,

this is what happened to me, and then in this case, say, Mr. Sharp says, no, that's not what happened. It was very different. That's really a trial issue. That's not something a judge is really going to do. dismiss on motion. So other types of cases that have more subtle elements to them, maybe can get dismissed on motion, but this kind of thing is really hard for a defendant to get rid of short trial. By the way, our content shows just how rampant crime is right now. And that is especially true with cybercrime. Cybercrime growing more dangerous and widespread. It threatens

businesses like never before. I mean, did you know that in 2024, one in five businesses fell victim to ransomware and half of those were small businesses yeah but don't worry apollo network is here to protect your business and help you fight against these business ending threats they use the latest cybersecurity technologies to monitor your systems 24-7 stopping threats before you even know they're there and preventing downtime and safeguarding your data beyond just protection they optimize your daily operations by managing your backups providing 24-7 tech support and being your trusted partner for all your IT needs their mission is simple deliver elite level security while helping your business run faster, more efficiently, and with peace of mind.

No business is too big or too small to be protected. From one computer to thousands, they have custom solutions to fit every industry. So right now, you can go to apollonetworks.com slash sidebar or scan the QR code on screen to get a free network health assessment and 50% off your first month. By the way, before we get into the context of the suit, Jane Doe, so filing under Jane Doe, a pseudonym, typically speaking, how likely is it that she will be able to continue moving forward in this litigation anonymously? I know in the Sean Combs case, several courts have said that the Jane Doe's, and possibly even the John Does, have had to come forward and reveal their identities.

Talk to me about what the court, the interests, the different factors the court will look at and whether or not Jane Doe would be able to proceed anonymously. Yeah, I'd say at best it's 50-50 that she's able to proceed in that fashion. I mean, Generally speaking, there's a strong preference in the courts for transparency and open proceedings that includes using your real name in the lawsuit. If you can convince a court that there's a public interest in keeping her name, you know, from the public, which can be something like safety issues, it can be the shame of the situation. If at the age of the person, you know, quite often if they're underage, you're much more likely to be able to keep, you know, the pseudonym. But in this kind of a case where it's one adult against another, unless there's any particular safety harms, it's not an easy thing to be able to commit a judge to keep it as agenda.

Yeah, and I've seen the argument put forward by the judge. Basically, if you are choosing to file a lawsuit and you are putting this celebrity in the spotlight, the defendant has a right to defend himself to investigate your claims, to investigate you. You're the one who chose to file the lawsuit and put your credibility at issue. so you should have to be able to proceed with your name and your identity being exposed. But again, there are certain factors to consider. And by the way, when we talk about Tony Busby, let's not forget, he filed numerous lawsuits on behalf of others against Sean Combs.

That's how his name has really come up in the news in the past several years, right? He held that press conference where he said that he was representing so many dozens and dozens of accusers against Sean Combs. So now I want to dig into what this lawsuit has to say. So Tony Busby, let me just say this, known for his flamboyant speech in his civil filings. And in this one doesn't appear to be any exception because it begins, a woman can say yes to consensual sexual relations with a man 99 times. But when she says no, even once, that no means no.

Defendant Shannon Sharp, a man who's accustomed to getting what he wants, completely fails to understand this basic concept. After many months of manipulating and controlling plaintiff, a woman more than 30 years younger than he and repeatedly threatening to brutally choke and violently slap her, Sharp refused to accept the answer no and raped plaintiff, despite her sobbing and repeated screams of no. According to the complaint, Jane Doe worked out at this same gym as Shannon Sharp in Los Angeles, and she was 19 at the time. This is what she claims. and she claims that he had been watching her during her workouts and finally introduced himself, insisting that she'd give him her number. And the filing says that Jane Doe found Sharp, quote, physically intimidating.

The lawsuit reads over the next couple of weeks, Sharp incessantly pursued plaintiff. He constantly approached her at the gym and attempted to contact her frequently with phone calls and text messages asking to meet up, unwilling to take no for an answer. Eventually, plaintiff gave in and agreed to meet with Sharp outside. of the gym. However, before doing so, Sharp demanded that Doe sign a non-disclosure agreement or NDA, something plaintiff found a bit concerning. She wondered why Sharp was so insistent on her

signing an NDA. She refused. Despite his repeated efforts to get her to sign, she refused time and again. Eventually, he dropped the issue and invited her to his house. Now, the lawsuit claims that this relationship between Sharp and Jane Doe, again, more than 30 years as junior, was consensual, but it was rocky. She said he'd insisted they were exclusive, but then was caught multiple times lying about his whereabouts and who he was seeing. According to the filing, quote,

by October 2024, Sharpe's behavior had grown progressively worse beyond anything plaintiff had experienced with him before. At this point, he was insistent upon recording their sexual activity, sometimes without her knowledge. Sharp was also sharing the videos with others, without her permission or knowledge.

Sharp would repeatedly tell, though, that he wanted to do to her things that would make no other man want her. By this point, Sharp was no longer able to credibly maintain the relationship was exclusive. He had at this point accidentally, or purposely, to advance his career, went live on Instagram while having sex with another woman. Sharp flew into fits of anger when plaintiff noted his infidelity to the relationship or called him out about his extraneous activities. What had once become manipulation, control, and intimidation now became something far more dangerous and sinister. Sharp even figured out how to get into Doe's apartment complex without her permission. Sharp made it clear that what Doe wanted was of no moment, that Sharp would get what he wanted when he wanted it. In October 24, Shannon Sharp violently sexually assaulted and anally raped plane of two different times in Las Vegas, Nevada,

blatantly ignoring her request for him to stop he did it again in january now before i get into what the claims uh for relief are here first john your thoughts on that narrative put forward by jane do yeah i mean it's deliberately graphic narrative there's nothing um inherently wrong with going into that level of detail in these types of cases to kind of get the court's attention on how serious this is, but it's probably on the more graphic side of the scale in terms of these types of pleadings. If there are recordings, how would she be able to get access to them, and how could that help her case?

Well, when she gets into civil discovery, she can demand copies of those, whether they exist or ever existed, we don't know, but if they do exist, he'll be required to produce those. And those could be significant. I mean, if you have videotapes of either non-consensual behavior or behavior that, you know, regardless of how it appears, looks like there's surreptitious recordings of somebody, I mean, that's definitely something that would look really bad for any defendant. Is it problematic for her that they were in a relationship? You know, he talks about in the beginning of the lawsuit, a woman can say yes 99 times. If she says no once and you continue on, that's sexual assault, that's rape. Do you believe that them being in a consensual relationship for a long period of time or a period of time?

Do you believe that, according to her claims, even after being asked to sign an NDA, she nonetheless engaged in a relationship with him? Do you think that hurts her credibility? I don't think it hurts her credibility. I think it's something that a defendant can use to their advantage to show the number of times that there was consensual sexual behavior as a, suggestion that maybe these these instances are being manipulated for the purpose of financial gain. So it's not quite as bright line as if though there had been never any sexual contact

between the two of them. But, you know, maybe if this was 25 years ago, it would be more of a problem. I think these days jurors have an understanding that people in intimate relationships can also be victims of sexual violence. So I wouldn't call it a big problem, but it's something that'll, that could be manipulated. I'm just reading this. this January 2025 alleged sexual assault. It's pretty disgusting. I mean, she basically says that she was begging for him to stop. He became more aggressive.

He wouldn't wear protection. And that this sexual assault lasted roughly 10 minutes. I'm not going to get into the details of it. How does she prove that? Is it just her testimony? Is it that if she told anybody? Let's say she didn't tell anybody. He didn't tell authorities.

Is it just her testimony against his? I mean, will that be the key of it, her taking the stand and explaining this happened to her? That's going to be the center of it for the both of them. They both have the ability to describe what did or didn't happen, and it's going to be believability. Like you said, if she did tell somebody, that's helpful. If she saw it any sort of medical treatment, that's also helpful. But it's also possible that neither of those things happen. It just becomes one person's word against another.

So she is suing for assault, sexual assault, battery, sexual battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. I imagine there's probably no statute of limitations issues since this is alleged to have occurred in 2023. Are these relatively broad causes of action, specific causes of action? Are they particularized in any way? Talk to me about what you believe about these causes of action that she's suing under.

I mean, that matches the facts of what she's alleged. You know, I think they're relatively specific to the information that's in the complaint. So, you know, that's the kind of collection of claims I would expect and the attorney to bring, given those facts that they laid out in the complaint. And the defense would be that either this didn't happen or it was consensual, right? Right. That's, those are, that's pretty much the two options. You know, most of the time these days, you know, because of things like, you know, DNA or other ways to corroborate some sort of sexual activity. Consent becomes the number one defense. So that's what we see most of the time. Remember when I said this was a $50 million lawsuit? So I want to

read you what she's suing for. General damages in the sum of excess of $10 million, special damages in the sum of excess $10 million, punitive damages, $20 million, statutory penalties, $10 million. That feels like a lot of money. I mean, now that you also wonder how do you put a price on if this really did happen, how do you put a price on sexual assault? But at the same time, $50 million for general special punitive statutory penalties. Talk to us about what those mean and whether or not those would be appropriate in a situation like this. Yeah, so the general damages are going to be her emotional distress damages. So what's the general impact to her now and kind of for the years to come as a result of going through this?

if this happened, and I want to underscore, we don't know if this happened. But if this happened, $10 million does not seem to me like an excessive amount of emotional distress damages. I mean, this is something that would stay with somebody for the rest of their life and be a significant struggle at various points in their life. The special damages are going to be economic losses. Those can be harder to establish. I mean, you'd have to use an economist to try to talk about how this is going to impact somebody's future career and their therapy, psychiatry, that sort of thing, it might be difficult to get up to $10 million for the special damages. The punitive damages, $20 million, those are damages that are just designed to punish somebody for their conduct. And again, if what has been outlined in the complaint is accurate, you know, I could see a jury awarding that sum. We talked about a case the other day where it was $1.7 billion that was awarded against

one individual, that was for 40 women, but still was about $42 million per plaintiff. So the pediatric damage figure is high, and these are all really high numbers, but they're not, I don't think they're inappropriate in terms of what they have in the complaint. I'm not sure what the statutory penalties are, what they're referring to. That's probably something that's specific to Nevada law. Interesting. Well, actually talking about other lawsuits, by the way, in this filing, in Busby's filing, It also mentions a lawsuit against Shannon Sharp out of New York.

This is one was filed by a woman named Michelle Evans, who's representing herself. She filed her complaint in New York State Court in December 2023. The case still ongoing. She's suing for defamation, libel, slander, slander of a woman, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, seeking at least $14 million in damages. And Evans makes many of the same claims against Sharp that Jane Doe does, including that she tried to distance herself from him after learning he was

having sexual relations with other women, but that he became enraged and attacked her. In fact, her lawsuit contains an alleged quote from Shannon Sharp that matches, I will say, almost word for word, a line in Jane Doe's complaint. So Evans' lawsuit says that Sharp told her during a sexual assault that, quote, he would make it so no other man would want me. Again, you just heard that. Jane Doe's lawsuit reads, Sharp would repeatedly tell Doe that he wanted to do to her things that would make no other man want her. And Evans' complaint also states, Michelle Evans was subjected to non-consensual

sexual encounters, which in itself is a deeply traumatic experience that has resulted in long-term psychological harm, post-traumatic stress disorder, PTSD, severe anxiety, and depression. The trauma is exacerbated by the public defamatory statements made by Shannon Sharp, which have led to public humiliation, loss of dignity, and a sense of betrayal. And she even provided a chart showing how Sharp's alleged actions impacted her. According to a sworn affidavit from Sharp, he denies the allegations that Michelle Evans has laid against him, says it was actually Evans, who was manipulative and threatening, says that she was harassing him via text messages and phone calls.

So it makes me wonder, since at the time of this recording, John, we're still like, this is breaking news. We haven't seen a response yet from Shannon Sharp could come out later after we air this. what do you imagine you're going to hear from him or his side? Well, you know, first of all, I think that they're going to be careful about saying too much right now. They're going to probably strongly deny the allegations and look forward to their day in court and maybe some other strong language, but I expected to be somewhat generalized and not responding to some of the individual facts of the case.

In regards to that other lawsuit, you know, what they're probably going to say is, well, well sure it lines up you know mr busby had the opportunity to read this lawsuit before drafting his own so that's the reason why why they match up so i would i would expect down the road we may hear something like that from from the sharp cam yeah i was wondering i mean there's two ways of looking at it you could say i someone could say i accept that both of these accounts are legitimate obviously you know they would say Shannon sharp has a pattern here he says the same things he does the same things Or, alternatively, this Jane Doe read that lawsuit and said, oh, she claimed that, I'll claim that. You know, you piggyback off of it.

Do you think that this is a case that would be advantageous for him to settle? I mean, obviously, we do not know what happened, right? He could say, none of this is true. I want to fight. I want to clear my name. Go through litigation, expensive. There's an emotional toll. There's a lot of different factors.

But if you settle it, what message does that send? Yeah, it's a tough situation because you don't want to settle it. You don't really want to go to trial on it either. I mean, going to trial in a year and a half and having all of this testimony come out, if it's consistent with what's in this complaint, you know, if somebody feels like they've been wrongfully accused, they want to vindicate themselves, they want to prove their innocence in court. But from a PR standpoint, for somebody who's high profile like Mr. Sharp,

going to trial is going to be a, it's a, difficult proposition for him. But what's the message of settling it? You know, maybe after things have calmed down, there might be a space to settle it and say, look, this was a business decision. I still don't believe anything what she's saying, but it was worth it to me to be able to move on with my life.

And that's the messaging that you can have once the initial media calms down, but whether or not that's something he wants to do or not, let's see. Could this potentially result in criminal charges? If she's willing to report, criminally. I don't know if she has or if she hasn't. But if she's willing to report, it certainly seems like it'd be within any statute of limitations, which is pretty lengthy to

start with. But I don't expect the Clark County authorities to just pick it up and run with it on their own. They're going to need to know that she's reporting and she's willing to go through with a case. John Clune, thank you so much for coming on real time, breaking this down with us real fast. I really, really appreciate it. Yeah, you bet, Jesse. Thanks. All right, everybody, that's all we have for you right now here on Sidebar. Thank you. so much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you should get your podcasts. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time.