Woman formally recants sexual assault allegations against Jay-Z
publishers 47articles 48first reported 25 Sep, 10:51 UTCdeveloping since 25 Sep · 5 editions
A woman who accused Jay-Z of raping her when she was 13 has formally recanted the allegation, saying in a declaration filed Thursday in Manhattan federal court that her claims against the rapper were false and that she has never met or spoken to him.
“Shawn ‘Jay-Z’ Carter never raped me,” the woman, identified in court as Jane Doe, wrote. “Mr. Carter never engaged in any inappropriate conduct toward me whatsoever.” She also said her claims that Jay-Z, whose legal name is Shawn Carter, and Sean “Diddy” Combs raped her were false and acknowledged that her accusations had caused Carter pain and damage.
The woman sued in 2024, alleging that Carter and Combs drugged and raped her at a party after the 2000 MTV Video Music Awards. Both men denied the allegation, and she dropped the lawsuit in February 2025.
Carter subsequently sued the woman, attorney Tony Buzbee and Buzbee’s law firm, alleging malicious prosecution and an effort to pressure him into a financial settlement. Carter has now voluntarily dismissed the woman as a defendant, while his case against her former lawyers continues.
In her declaration, the woman said a Facebook advertisement seeking potential sexual-assault claims against Combs triggered memories of being assaulted as a teenager. She alleged that lawyers filed her initial lawsuit without her authorization or an independent investigation. Her current lawyer said she maintains that she was sexually assaulted but was mistaken in identifying Carter.
Buzbee told Rolling Stone that several lawyers had heard the same account from the woman before she met him and said any admission that she lied to lawyers and the court would be new information.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 3 articles, 3 with the publisher's own text; 3 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written within the hour the record first saw the story; the editor revised it.
- Publishers
- 47
- Source articles
- 48
- Given to the writer
- 3, 3 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 3
- This version written
- within the hour the record first saw the story
- Second model (editor)
- revised
- Publication gate
- passed
- Human review
- none
Written by a language model from the sources above, then checked by a second model that may only cut, attribute or correct. How it works →