Combs' Lawyers Challenge Validity of Sex Trafficking Law, Seeking Dismissal of Lawsuit

Attorneys for hip-hop mogul Sean "Diddy" Combs are arguing that an extension to the statute of limitations created by New York City's Victim of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law (VGM) is invalid and contradicts state law. The lawsuit accuses Combs and other Bad Boy executives of sexually assaulting an 11th-grader in 2003.

Attorneys for Sean "Diddy" Combs are challenging the validity of New York City's Victim of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law (VGM), arguing that it contradicts state law and is invalid. This move comes as part of their efforts to dismiss a sex trafficking lawsuit filed against the hip-hop mogul.

The explosive lawsuit, filed under the VGM, accuses Combs and two other Bad Boy executives of sexually assaulting an 11th-grader in 2003. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants flew her from Detroit to New York City and back again in a whirlwind night of booze, sex, and drugs.

Jonathan Davis, one of Combs' high-powered Manhattan attorneys, has called the allegations "entirely false and hideous." He argues that the city's law, which created a second extension to file claims that were already limited by the prior statute of limitations, is preempted by a similar state law that has also expired.

Davis contends that the statute of limitations has expired, as has the extension window created by New York's Child Victims Act (CVA). The CVA gave victims who were under the age of 18 at the time of their alleged sex assault a two-year window to file their claims, which closed in 2021.

However, the Democrat-dominated New York City Council's 2022 amendment to the VGM created another two-year extension window beginning on March 1, 2023. Combs' attorneys are disputing the validity of this city law.

They argue that "New York state law trumps New York City law, without exception" and are asking the court to shutter that window.

Michael Willemin, a partner at the Wigdor law firm representing the plaintiff, is confident that the judge will rule against Combs on this matter. He says that Combs' motion is "just a desperate attempt... to avoid accountability for Ms. Doe’s allegations of gang rape and sexual assault."

Legal experts have mixed expectations for Combs' motion to dismiss. David Gelman, a New Jersey-based defense attorney and former prosecutor, believes Davis "hit the nail on the head" with his arguments. He says that the city cannot unilaterally change the law and go against the state.

Neama Rahmani, a Los Angeles-based trial attorney and former federal prosecutor, thinks Combs' lawyers made "creative arguments" but expects the judge to allow the case to move forward. He believes that legislatures can reopen the statute of limitations for civil claims and that the plaintiffs have alleged enough facts to argue that the corporate defendants were negligent in retaining or supervising Combs.

Combs has denied all allegations of wrongdoing and has not been charged with a crime. He has accused some of his accusers of seeking "an underserved payday."

In addition to the sex abuse lawsuits, Combs is also facing litigation that accuses him of leaving a New Orleans design firm on the hook for $100,000 in material costs after postponing an event for which he had hired it to build a structure.