Law&Crime Sidebar - Meek Mill's Lawyer Reacts to 5 Disturbing Claims in Jay-Z Rape Complaint

Episode Date: December 10, 2024

Attorneys for Jay-Z, whose real name is Shawn Carter, filed a flurry of motions in response to an amended complaint that named the rapper as an accomplice in the alleged rape of a teenage girl at a party. The lawsuit first targeted Sean “Diddy” Combs, with two unnamed celebrities allegedly watching or participating in the attack. Now that Jay-Z’s has been named, he wants the Jane Doe plaintiff to do the same herself. Law&Crime’s Jesse Weber sat down with Brian McMonagle, a celebrity criminal defense attorney who previously represented rapper Meek Mill, to discuss the latest filings.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:If you’re ever injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can submit a claim in 8 clicks or less without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: https://www.forthepeople.com/LCSidebarHOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael Deininger and Christina FalconeScript 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 Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. The aftermath of JZ being accused of raping a teenager is still unfolding. From a contentious back and forth between lawyers and a new interesting comment from rapper Meek Mill, I'm going to sit down with acclaimed criminal defense attorney Brian McMonigal, who used to represent Meek Mill and get his testimony. take on this whole Jay-Z development. Welcome to Sidebar. Presented by Law and Crime, I'm Jesse Weber. Okay, follow up now to a massive story that we covered yesterday where the rapper and business mogul Jay-Z,

Sean Carter, has been listed as a defendant in a Sean Combs lawsuit. More specifically, he is accused of raping a 13-year-old girl back in 2000 at a VMA's Video Music Awards Afterparty. Now, Jay-Z put out a statement immediately, adamantly denying the allegations, and he took aim at the attorney behind this lawsuit, Tony Busby, who represents other Combs accusers. And the statement said in part, quote, my lawyer received a blackmail attempt called a demand letter from a lawyer named Tony Busby. What he had calculated was the nature of these allegations and the public scrutiny would make me want to settle. No, sir. It had the opposite effect. It made me want to expose you for the. fraud you are in a very public fashion. So no, I will not give you one red penny. And he also said in the statement, you have made a terrible error in judgment thinking that all celebrities are the

same. And then later on, he said, I look forward to showing you just how different I am. And we also learned yesterday that it was Jay-Z who filed a lawsuit against Tony Busby last month, accusing the Texas lawyer of trying to extort him. This is something that we covered on a previous sidebar. And their argument is they were forced to either pay up or Busby would file a lawsuit against him with what he claims are false accusations. Now, Busby responded on X a few times since Jay-Z posted this. And most recently, he posted this comment on X. It says, The New York Times contacted me to ask for my response to rapper Jay-Z's allegations that I tried to extort and blackmail him. My response is pretty straightforward. No one has made any

threats. Jay Z's assertions are bogus and laughable. Instead, our firm sent a standard demand letter seeking a mediation on behalf of a woman who alleges Jay Z sexually assaulted her as a minor. The letter was vetted and approved by her client whose preference was to attempt resolution short of filing a lawsuit. This approach is common in these types of cases. What you're seeing played out now is a coordinated and desperate effort to focus the public's attention on me personally to avoid attention on the allegations being made by my clients. This effort has included harassing my family and colleagues and even offering former clients money to sue me, which is illegal. When an alleged perpetrator behaves in this manner wildly asserting that a basic demand

letter is extortion and aggressively using the media to attack the opposing lawyer while at the same time ignoring the allegations being made by the alleged victim, it reminds me of a famous line from Shakespeare. The lady doth protest too much, me thinks. We intend to address all of these issues with the court in due course. Let me be clear. We will not be bullied or intimidated by these shenanigans, and our clients won't be silence. So you have two competing sides here who both are adamant in what they are saying and both saying they will not back down and they will not be silence. So it's going to be very interesting to see if this eventually goes to a trial, what evidence will be presented, and which,

side will have the more compelling argument. But few things to break down about this, few things to talk about this. First, we're going to get into the reaction to this lawsuit because someone has come out with a very interesting comment. And that is rapper Meek Mill. Now, his name has been circulating a lot, mostly online due to his reported connection to Sean Combs. His name has come up this past year. You know, there was speculation that he was mentioned in one of the sexual assault lawsuits that has been filed against Sean Combs. This one was filed by Sean Combs's former producer Rodney Lilrod Jones because in that lawsuit, Jones alleges that Combs admitted to him that he engaged in sexual intercourse with a quote, unidentified Philadelphia rapper who dated Nikki Minaj.

And there are those who have speculated online that that is Meek Mill. Now, at the time, Meek Mill posted on X, one love to the gay people, but then he talked about in graphic detail how much he loves a certain part of the female anatomy. By the way, as we're talking about the lawyering from both sides here in the JZ case, I got to tell you, I thought about Morgan and Morgan, America's largest injury law firm, our sponsor, our partner, great lawyers. Here's the deal. If you should get injured, you have to know what your legal rights are and whether your case could be worth millions of dollars. Morgan and Morgan, who has over a thousand attorneys, they have a proven track record of winning big. And recently, they secured verdicts of

$12 million in Florida, $26 million in Philadelphia, $6.8 million in New York, all far exceeding the insurance offers in these cases. And even if your case isn't worth seven figures, why not start a claim and get the money you deserve? So if you're injured, you can easily start a claim at for the people.com slash LC sidebar. Why is Meek Mill coming up now? While in the wake of Jay-Z being named as a defendant in this lawsuit, Meek Mill took once again to X, and he wrote, the goal is to start false narratives to create a matrix web. If you can control the story, like you can control the matrix, American media is totally unbelievable. I see Jay-Z blank a 13-year-old girl 300 times scrolling. It's called programming.

Not entirely clear what he means, but again, I'm going to be speaking with his former lawyer in a minute, and hopefully we'll get a little bit more clarity on that. But another issue that I want to get into is this whole back and forth about whether the plaintiff in this case, Jane Doe, can proceed with this case anonymously. Can she move forward without revealing her name just by going with Jane Doe? And it's really interesting. It's an interesting issue because what did we just discuss in a previous sidebar that Anna Kane had to reveal her identity in her sexual assault lawsuit against Sean Combs? She was actually the fifth person to sue him back in December of 2023. And you know, it's interesting about it. It's different

than a criminal case, right? Because in a criminal case, sometimes alleged victims, alleged accusers, they can proceed with Jane Doe or John Doe. It makes sense because they're not filing a lawsuit. They might not necessarily have wanted to testify. Yes, their prosecution witnesses. Yes, they're cooperating. But it's a little bit different than when you actively file a lawsuit, you're putting your credibility at issue. That was one of the issues that came up before why certain people had to reveal their names. But let's get into this. So Tony, Tony, Busby writes in a filing to the court two days ago. And he writes, if required by this court, I will disclose plaintiff's name to counsel for defendants. However, I would request a hearing

prior to any such order. Plaintiff Jane Doe was a minor, age 13 at the time the incident occurred. Plaintiff is by no means the only victim of Mr. Combs to fear violence and retribution for coming forward. My firm currently represents over 200 clients with claims against Mr. Combs. Strikingly, an overwhelming number of these clients, likely in excess of 80%, have stated to me or attorneys at my firm during their intake process that Mr. Combs made threats of violence against them or against the client's family members, if the client disclosed to anyone the facts of the sexual assaults or other acts of Mr. Combs of which they were a victim. For many of the clients referenced above, Mr. Combs' threats of violence were a primary reason why they did not speak out or file lawsuits earlier. Most of our clients still fear retribution and have conditioned moving forward on anonymity. And Busby actually filed a legal brief in support of this, and he argues that due to the sensitive and personal nature of these allegations, her anonymity outweighs any other factors. That the media tension on this case would create a chilling effect on people coming forward with claims of sexual assault of his client were forced to reveal who she is,

that the plaintiff's experiences here are incredibly traumatic and having those experiences play out in a public forum where she has to reveal who she is that could create more trauma for her. Moreover, he argues that the defendants, they won't be prejudiced if plaintiff remains anonymous because Combs didn't know who she was before during and after the alleged assault.

He also emphasized that the need for her to remain anonymous is for her safety. And he seems to make an argument that it's also premature to reveal, Jane Doe's identity because it's too early in the case. Right now, all the defendants need to do is answer the complaint first. Why does she need to immediately reveal her identity? Now, Jay-Z's lawyers are fighting back, and they're saying, look, we are petitioning the court

right now to order either Jane Doe has to reveal her identity or court dismiss this complaint. And they, too, filed a legal brief in support of their argument. By the way, Jay-Z Carter is being represented by Alex Spiro, who, as we know, famously represented Alec Baldwin in his manslaughter trial. Little tidbit there. Now, I want to read you the opening paragraph in Jay-Z's brief. It says, for months, an extortionate campaign has been targeting this named defendant under cover of darkness.

That campaign was cynical and calculated to force payment of an exorbitant sum of money. Defendant would have to pay X millions of dollars, irrespective of the truth, or else. When defendant refused to pay and instead took measures to establish his innocence, this unnamed plaintiff and her self-promoting counsel, whose name has been splashed across headlines and press conferences under auspices of representing her, went to extraordinary lengths to shut down fair defense. But those efforts, too, failed. Now at last, the false, unfounded allegations that underlie this campaign of extortion are having judicial light shine on them, except that this plaintiff is bringing them as a doe who would continue to hide under cover of darkness.

So Jay-Z makes the argument that lawsuits, they are public. The public has a right to know Jane Doe's name, and federal law requires all parties who litigate to use their real names, except under extraordinary circumstances. He also says that there is no evidence that Carter ever threatened Jane Doe or that allegations have been made against him, that he has threatened violence or severe harassment or retribution. those are claims about Sean Combs, not about Sean Carter. Now, essentially, you can't group the allegations against Sean Combs with him. And just making blanket statements that there could be retribution without some evidence, that's not enough to warrant remaining anonymous, that there is a security concern. Moreover, Jay-Z argues that courts in other Sean Combs cases force the plaintiffs to reveal their identities.

I mentioned that before with Anna Kame. One court holding, the court concludes that the balance of interest at stake weighs strongly against granting plaintiff's motion. This is about her trying to remain anonymous, where plaintiff, who is an adult, has now decided to file a lawsuit in which she accuses a famous person of engaging in heinous conduct approximately 20 years ago. And defendants have a right to defend themselves, including by investigating plaintiff and the people have a right to know who is using their courts. The other court saying, while the court does not take plaintiff's concerns lightly, the court cannot rely on. ungeneralized, uncorroborated claims that disclosure would harm plaintiff to justify her anonymity. And the greater public policy argument, too, that we're seeing in Jay-Z's responses, if you take the reasoning from Jane Doe here, then any victim or alleged victim of sexual assault,

they would be able to proceed anonymously in their case. And is that right? The argument here from Jay-Z is, you need more. You need to cite a mental health professional who reviewed the plaintiff. You need an affidavit from the plaintiff herself to talk about the trauma, to talk about what would happen if her identity was revealed. And the defendant, they say, has a right to investigate her background and challenge her allegations. Other combs accusers have named themselves too. Why should she remain anonymous? And by the way, they say courts don't like to proceed anonymously if there is a private

person. It's different if there's a famous person. And they also make the argument that if you keep her anonymous, people who have evidence against her or who have evidence that the defense can use in their case, they can't come forward. They don't know who she is. And that's not fair. So Jay-Z is saying if you don't follow the federal rules here, the court will have no choice but to dismiss this lawsuit. So with all of that in mind, I want to bring on a special guest, fan favorite on the show, acclaimed national criminal defense attorney, Brian J. McManagel, from McMonigle, Perry, McHugh, Mishak, and Davis.

Thank you so much for coming on. Great seeing you as always. just your initial impressions of this Jay-Z lawsuit. I mean, we were all wondering who celebrity A was in this lawsuit when it was first filed. And now that it has been revealed to be Jay-Z, what's your initial impressions? Shock, first of all. And then secondly, this is going to be World War III. Jay-Z has taken the gloves off. He's taken this personal as he should.

He's been accused of raping a 13-year-old. and in his world, that's unabitable. And I was, I was particularly impressed with the response, I must tell you. They called out Tony Busby. It got personal. It is personal, and it's going to get more personal. I can assure you. Who's right?

Let me, let me your phrase, this extortion argument. And I've previewed it for our audience before. I was talking about it. But I will just give everybody another sampling of this. So this is from one of Sean. Carter's filings, one of Jay Z's filings, and I'll read it to you. To coerce Mr. Carter into compliance, plaintiff and attorney Busby imposed an arbitrary deadline in their extortionate demand letter, warning Mr. Carter that they would take a different course if he did not agree

to a confidential mediation to resolve this delicate and important matter. Without even waiting for the deadline provided by the extortionate demand letter to pass, Attorney Busby posted on social media that he intended to file a lawsuit naming Mr. Carter and attaching the extortionate man letter to punish Mr. Carter for seeking redress from a court. All along, Mr. Carter refused to bow to attorney Busby's scheme, faced with a choice to either pay an exorbitant sum to silence plaintiffs wild, false allegations of sexual assault, risking a reper will harm to his reputation, family, career, and livelihood, or face a barrage of baseless lawsuits and financial ruin, Mr. Carter stood his ground. On November 18th, 2024, Mr. Carter filed a complaint against

Attorney Busby and his law firm for his extortionate conduct. Is Jay Zee's right here? Well, listen, this has become cottage industry. Sexual assault allegations against celebrities always take this track. What Mr. Busby's doing here, I'm sure he has done time and time again in the past, probably with success, and this time they're calling him out on it. Isn't it sophisticated extortion? Hey, listen, we're going to bring a case if you don't pay us money. If the case has legitimacy, if the case walks on its own, why not just bring it. They're trying to use the pressure of public insult as a means to get paid. And I, for one, like the response. I think the time has come to sometimes call out these attempts at trying

to derive money from people with a lot of money on allegations that may not survive under the light a day. And they've shined a light on it right now. And keep in mind, there's no law enforcement component to this. This man hasn't been charged with any crime. There's no leverage here in that regard. What's the leverage? Hey, listen, we're going to drive a news story right now by filing a complaint, and everybody all over the world is going to think you're a child abuser unless you pay me some money. Where I come from, that's extortion. Now, Tony Busby would say it was just a, it was a letter for a confidential mediation. He wasn't demanding a penny from Jay-Z. What's your response to that?

Exactly what he would say, and that's probably exactly what he did. I mean, where do you stand on these two fronts? If Jay-Z is innocent as he proclaims and what is happening here is despicable, no question about it. If Tony Busby has some real evidence and wants to take an accuser who he's tried to keep anonymous and bring that person to bear who can now make an allegation so we can look at it and examine it, keep in mind he's asked for anonymity here. I mean, think about that.

accused of rape in a 13-year-old, we're not going to tell you who it is or where they're from or how you could possibly even defend against that accusation. And by the way, can you give us, you know, maybe $5, $10 million before we even bring the lawsuit? So who's right, who's wrong? We're going to find out. But I'm going to tell you something. They just picked a fight with a guy who can defend. I was, I've had the privilege of having the support of Jay Z during meek mills travels and prevails when he was unjustly dealt with in the criminal justice system and when he puts his mind to something he usually finishes the mission now you that leads me to my next point i mean you famously represented uh meek mill um your former client made a

statement uh in regards to this j z development i read it before what do you make of it it felt a little confusing well i think where where meek is going with this is probably something we've all seen for a long time and felt for a long time, which is anybody anywhere can say anything. And because of the way social media is today, it takes on a life of its own. And there are people who've never met you, don't know you, who are going to jump to conclusions about you because they can't open their phones up and not read something that's, you know, scandalous about you. And it takes a life of its own, and it can destroy you with a word.

You know, there was a time when accusations had some scrutiny to. of them. You know, you had to be careful before you're pointing the finger at somebody. Not anymore. Shoot first, ask questions later. And so I think that's his giant complaint, which is, where do I go to get my reputation back now? Who do I go to to defend this? What do I say? I didn't do it. That's not going to be enough because the doors already be open and opened by the scandalous accusations. So I think that's where he's coming from. I think there's a lot of people who feel that way. And it's interesting because it makes me wonder, him, Jay, fighting this? How as Sean Combs had fought it back in, you know, late 2023, is there a risk

that now more people could come forward with lawsuits against Jay-Z? Because if you listen to Tony Busby, he seems to imply in his filings that Jay-Z is essentially complicit in more doings with Sean Combs. And the idea was, you know, Sean Combs famously didn't settle the Cassandra Ventura lawsuit before it was filed, settled it after it was filed. Do you think Jay-Z could be concerned that other people might file lawsuits? I don't, I think he's, I think he's driving a stake right in the ground. I think what he's doing is, uh-uh, I'm taking a stand here. This is a hill I'm going to die on right now because I'm not dealing with this anymore.

I'm not going to be, as he uses the word, um, subjected to extortionate demands anymore. If you're going to pick a fight with me, don't bother asking me for money. It's a fight. I'm innocent. And so I like the attack. I like the way he's responding to attacks because they'll just keep coming. And so anybody who wants to bring it better know, I've got the best lawyers in America and you better, you better have what you say you have.

Now, one of the ways that he's trying to get rid of this lawsuit is by petitioning the court to order that Jane Doe reveal her identity. And that has happened before in not only other cases, but it's happened before in other Sean Combs related cases. And he is saying, you know, this is a violation of the federal rules, the case be thrown out or B, have a reveal herself, which you and I both know that could deter somebody from continuing their lawsuit if they have to reveal themselves. Do you think she should have to reveal herself, Jane Doe? I do. I believe in the right to confrontation. You know, you're going to

make an accusation against somebody and not give them the facts. You're going to accuse somebody of perhaps one of the most, if not the most heinous crime that exists, the rape of a child and not hold that accusation up to the light. I don't see how it could, you know, it could, go any other way? How could we allow people to anonymously accuse people? It's my understanding this isn't a child anymore. And if this isn't, and if this is an adult, let that adult come forward and make a credible accusation or sit down. The counter arguments that were put forward by Tony Busby are this is highly sensitive information. This would be incredibly traumatic for her. This would deter other people from coming forward with similar claims. If they knew their identities

were going to be revealed. This is premature. Right now, we're in the early stages of this litigation. I mean, right now, Jay-Z just has to file an answer. We don't have to deal with her, you know, revealing herself at this point. And there's a number of other arguments that they have made. What's your take on that? My response would be, where's the criminal investigation? What do you really saying here? We want money. I mean, that's what you're saying. We want money. But now we want justice. We want money. And so you want money and yet you don't want to reveal yourself. You want money and you're saying, well, this is a little bit too personal for me. I have a different view of it. I mean, had this come along the usual track where there had been a law enforcement investigation, had there been a, you know, an allegation made to law enforcement, I might look at this a different way. And I think I think JZ's lawyers are doing the same. I think what they're saying is this is nothing more than a money grant. And listen, if there's any legitimacy to it, give us your name. Let us investigate where you were, what you did, what we did.

Have we ever met you? Do I even know who you are? In what world would you pay money to somebody where you don't even know who they are? And so I think they've done everything they should do. And now the rubber is going to meet the road because I think a court is going to make this individual will reveal themselves. And they're going to have to make a decision as to whether or not they want to bring this into a court of law. And in a court of law, all the gloves are coming off. Would it be sufficient for the identity to be revealed to Jay-Z's lawyers? Not Jay-Z, not anybody else

in this camp, but just Jay-Z's lawyers. That's something that Tony Busby had seemed to indicate that he'd be open to. Is that something you've seen before? Do you think that would be sufficient? A court might do that. A court might split the baby and make a decision that kind of protects everybody interest. I've got to tell you, though, I've seen that fall apart in a hurry, you know, trying to provide information that only goes to lawyers, and the next thing you know, some investigator finds out, and the next thing you know, it's on the six o'clock news. But a court could very well do that. It could balance interest, as sometimes courts do, provide information so Jay-Z's lawyers can investigate the claim, can investigate the accuser, can see if the two ever even

met in life, and give them what they need without sacrificing. an individual to some scandalous publicity. I think I think that's that's something that's possible. One of the things he's also asking for is an expedited hearing on this anonymous issue. And in filing from yesterday, I'll read it what it says. It says this is from Jay-Z. For the avoidance of doubt, Mr. Carter is entirely innocent. This is a shakedown. He is not mentioned, referenced, or implicated in any way in the criminal investigation of Mr. Combs. He is neither a target nor a person of interest in that investigation. Adding to the urgency of this matter, Attorney Tony Busby has orchestrated a months-long press campaign

aimed at inflaming public opinion and escalating the events in real-time on social media platforms. Every day and in real-time, Busby continues to amplify false narratives, exploiting the legal process to generate media attention and damage Mr. Carter's reputation. This relentless campaign underscores the need for a fast-track hearing to address these issues promptly and prevent further harm. You think a judge would order an expedited hearing and potentially order the identity of this Jane Doe to be revealed sooner rather than later? I do. You know, think about the damage that's being done.

I mean, think about the business opportunities that are being lost. Think about corporations that are being affected by this. Connections with the NFL. This is a big deal when you make an allegation like this. And I think a court's going to realize that the damage to his reputation can be so significant that let's get too. this immediately so we can treat this like like every other case. That's treated like a civil case ought to be trot or ought to be handled. And I think a judge is going to do that. I really

do. Let me ask you this. How would it even work in your experience with someone remaining anonymous? And let's say that identity is not revealed to either Jay-Z or his defense counsel. The first time they would know who this person is at trial if that person testifies. I mean, How does it work preparing a defense if you don't know who the plaintiff is? How does it work? Never, never had it happen. I don't anticipate it's going to happen here. I think it becomes a timing issue.

I think there'll be a certain period of time if a judge were to lean their way toward anonymity to at some point in time. There'd have to be a disclosure. There's going to have to be a public trial. This is not a child where, you know, certain steps can be maintained to make, you know, anonymity complete throughout a trial that will never happen here. there won't be initials here. I don't anticipate it happening.

I just don't see how this comports with federal law in any way. And the ask that's been made by Mr. Busby, I think, is too big an ask for a court to grant. Before I let you go, I want to ask you real quick, you mentioned you appreciate the way that Jay-Z and his team, represented by Alex Spiro, have responded to Tony Busby. It's interesting to think about because you know that Jay-Z is not the only high-profile celebrity. who, if you're listening to Tony Busby's prior comments, he said there's a lot of high-profile people. They've come forward. They've tried to settle their claims before they're mentioned. A lot of people wonder who's in Sean Combs' orbit. If this strategy from Jay-Z proved successful, an aggressive strategy, maybe can get this complaint tossed out, do you think other people,

other celebrities who maybe be in a similar position, they'll say, you know what? File your lawsuit against me. We're going to do what Jay-Z did. We're going to be aggressive, as well and more names might come up because right now it seems like Jay-Z is the first person since this whole scandal broke who is allegedly been implicated in Sean Combe scheme. Yeah, you know, I do think that a lot of people are looking hard at this now because the old way of handling these cases were, hey, this guy is 10 cents and let them go home. The question's going to be individual case by case, are they innocent of the accusation? Do they have dirty hands?

Can they defend the accusation at the end of the day? You know, some of these cases, there's legitimate cries. This seems to be one where you've got a guy saying, I didn't do it. I'm not putting up with this nonsense. So I think you are going to see a lot of other people taking this position because, you know, I think a lot of people, a lot of regular people, day-to-day people who, you know, turn on the news, who watch your show, they're going to say to themselves, you know what, let's put these accusations to the test. good for them stand up defend yourself don't pay the big defend the case i think we're going to see

more of it and i think a lot more names are going to start flushing it's it seems no one's back and down i mean tony busby says he's got the evidence he's like let the filing speak for themselves in terms of the accusations j z fighting back i'll be very curious to see where this goes it is an incredibly disturbing allegation and account in this complaint and we will see if the plaintiff can ultimately prove it and if it goes to trial because right now we're we're going to deal with this issue of if her identity has to be revealed and that could definitely affect this case. Brian McMonigal, so good seeing you. Thanks so much for taking the time. Thanks for having me. It's good to see you. 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 Apple Podcast, Spotify, YouTube, wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time. You can binge all episodes of this law and crime series ad free right now on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.