Snoop Dogg told a federal judge on Thursday (Feb. 24) that a dancer’s recent sexual assault lawsuit was a “thinly veiled attempt to extort defendant for money” just days before he was set to appear during the Super Bowl halftime show.
In a motion to dismiss the case filed in Los Angeles federal court, the rapper’s attorneys said the Jane Doe accuser’s lawsuit was legally flawed in a variety of ways, including that it was filed years too late. But, according to Snoop’s lawyers, sound legal arguments were not the main purpose of bringing the case.
“Plaintiff’s complaint, launched just days before Defendant’s Super Bowl Halftime performance, was a thinly veiled attempt to extort Defendant for money to stop Plaintiff from continuing to assert her false claims publicly,” wrote Jennifer L. Keller of the law firm Keller/Anderle LLP. “But the fatal deficiencies in her complaint ensure her gambit will not succeed.”
The attorney who represents the Jane Doe accuser, Matt E.O. Finkelberg, did not immediately return a request for comment on Thursday evening.
In her lawsuit filed on Feb. 9, the Jane Doe accuser alleged that both Snoop Dogg and Bishop Don “Magic” Juan separately assaulted her over a 24-hour span in May 2013. She also says she was not hired again because she rebuffed their advances.
The complaint included startling and explicit allegations against both men. The lawsuit claims that Doe was first assaulted by Juan — whose real name is Donald Campbell — after she accepted a ride home, fell asleep in the car and woke up at his house. She claims he “repeatedly shoved” himself into her mouth the next morning.
The pair then traveled to Snoop Dogg’s recording studio, the lawsuit says, where Doe claims the rapper, whose real name is Calvin Broadus, barged into a bathroom while she was using it and demanded oral sex. She says she reluctantly complied because she was “afraid for her safety and for her life.” She claims he then masturbated onto her.
In Thursday’s response, Snoop’s attorneys said that each of the lawsuit’s specific claims was meritless. For instance, they argued that a claim for federal sex trafficking was not the kind of thing the statute was designed to prevent.
“If accepted as a sufficient pleading, Plaintiff’s claim would transform into federal sex trafficking every alleged sex act between a defendant and a plaintiff with lesser means, fame, or influence,” Snoop’s lawyers wrote.
As for the primary claims of sexual assault and sexual battery, Snoop’s attorneys said they were clearly barred by California’s two-year statute of limitations for such accusations.
Meanwhile, attorneys for Bishop Don “Magic” Juan also filed a separate motion to dismiss the claims against him, making similar arguments to Snoop’s attorneys.
