By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Stand-up
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - ESPN
SDNY COURTHOUSE, May 26 – Anthony Rapp's lawsuit against Kevin Spacey was removed to Federal court in November 2020, and an anonymous co-plaintiff C.D. was added.
Spacey wanted to make C.D.'s name public, to order to conduct discovery, he says. C.D.'s lawyers opposed it, letter on Patreon here.
On May 26, 2022 U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Lewis A. Kaplan held a hearing, with Spacey testifying, on Rapp's motion to remand the case. Judge Kaplan at the end said it is his present intention to deny the motion to remand, and that the trial will start in October. Inner City Press attended then tweeted here:
OK - Kevin Spacey cross examination and re-direct in sex abuse case against him in court, Evidentiary hearing was kicked off by Rapp's lawyer Richard Steigman, cross examining Spacey:
Q: So you had a 10 year contract with the theater in London? Spacey: After a while it was only a part time job. I moved to Maryland while shooting House of Cards.
Q: But didn't you say, I am a New Yorker? Spacey: I meant that in terms of attitude. Q: You were fired by Netflix in 2017 after this lawsuit, & others came forward? Spacey (long pause) "Yes." Q: And you left Maryland for LA? Spacey: I was taking care of myself.
Q: Did you pay taxes in Maryland? Spacey's lawyer Chase Scolnick: Objection! Judge Kaplan: These tax documents are in the record. Sustained. Q: Are you a saver? Spacey: Some things I save, and some I throw away. (Smiles at gallery).
Q: Do you take pictures of yourself in places? Spacey: Never. Q: Do you have any evidence of buying or eating food in Maryland at that time? Spacey: I ate. Q: Why didn't you submit them? Objection: record speaks for itself.
Q: You traveled to Serbia and Morocco and elsewhere? Spacey: Yes. And to Abu Dhabi, for my foundation. And to shoot an ad in Warsaw. But I returned to Maryland. To my pier home on the Inner Harbor. Baltimore beguiles me.
Re-direct by Spacey's lawyer Scolnick: Q: Do you have a favorite restaurant in Baltimore? Spacey: Agave is great Mexican. And a sushi place behind the Four Season. And Dominos, I shouldn't mention.
Rapp's lawyer Steigman will have another chance to speak. Given the re-direct about London, will he ask about Spacey throne photo with Ghislaine Maxwell, if not the flight(s) on Jeffrey Epstein's Lolita Express?
Update / update: Judge Kaplan ended the proceeding by saying it is his present intention to DENY Rapp's renewed motion to remand the case. So it will stay Federal, with trial in October. Inner City Press will cover it (now, out to Worth Street to try to Q Spacey [Video here]
Back on September 9, 2021, Judge Kaplan held a proceeding about 60 new names, and sealed affidavits. Inner City Press live tweeted it here and below.
On December 9 at 4:30 pm, six hours after the US v. Ghislaine Maxwell trial was paused at least for one day due to an ill prosecutor, Judge Kaplan held another proceeding in Rapp v. Spacey (or Fowler) and Inner City Press live tweeted it here, podcast (including on Maxwell and UN) here.
On December 10, Rapp's lawyer wrote to Judge Kaplan and asked that his forthcoming protective order including an order prohibiting disclosure of names of those alleging abuse by Spacey - full letter on Patreon here.
On March 10, 2022 a trial date was set: "ORDER, This case is set for trial on October 4, 2022 at 9:30 a.m. subject to any changes warranted by pandemic circumstances. SO ORDERED. ( Jury Trial set for 10/4/2022 at 09:30 AM before Judge Lewis A. Kaplan.) (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 3/10/22)"
On April 13, this: "MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. The Court is considering whether to hold a targeted evidentiary hearing on plaintiff Rapp's motion to remand insofar as raises the issue of the defendant's domicile at a relevant time or times, see Zappia Middle E. Constr. Co. v. Emirate of Abu Dhabi, 215 F.3d 247,253 (2d Cir. 2000), and, should it elect to do so, whether it should hear live testimony (whether in person or via video) from any witness( es) in addition to the defendant. Counsel shall confer promptly concerning their views on these issues. On or before April 20, they shall file a report or reports as to their position or positions on these matters including their rationales for hearing live testimony from any suggested witness other than the defendant. The parties shall include in the report or reports a statement as to dates in May and June when such a hearing conveniently could be held and its estimated duration. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 4/13/22)."
On March 14, digging in Miscellaneous cases, Inner City Press came upon satellite litigation between Spacey and Adam Vary, who citing the First Amendment and shield laws declined to answer questions at a deposition.
Judge Kaplan ordered Vary to answer the subpoena by May 31. On May 23, Vary's counsel asked for reconsideration or a two week stay in order to appeal. This case is Fowler v. Vary, 22-mc-63 (Kaplan)
Inner City Press will continue to follow these cases.
From back on Dec 9: now in Rapp v. Kevin Spacey (for rape of 14 year-old), a proceeding in SDNY by phone, in a case which Inner City Press has been reporting on and will, in haitus from #MaxwellTrial which has no call-in line, live tweet:
Spacey, defending himself from claim he raped Rapp, wanted get discovery into all of his past relationships.
Spacey's lawyer: He's only alleging that Mr Fowler [that is, Kevin Spacey] picked him up and dropped him. It's essentially child abuse, not sexual assault.
On January 10, 2021 Spacey's lawyer wrote to Judge Kaplan to preclude Rapp from calling Justin Dawes as a witness, including portions of his December 28, 2021 deposition. They argue that Dawes withheld information, the name of an "unnamed friend."
On January 12, Rapp's lawyers filed a 5 page letter including that "Mr. Dawes, he agreed to voluntarily, without a subpoena, testify about how Spacey made an inappropriate sexual advance on him when he was a minor... " at one point his hand was on my leg. You know, I thought it was mildly uncomfortable. I did not, you know, feel threatened, but I thought it was a kind of, you know, probing of a sexual nature to see how comfortable I was with that.'" Full letter on Patreon here.
Watch this site. Inner City Press will stay on it - podcast
Watch this site.
From February 23: Lawyers for Kevin Spacey are arguing to strike testimony of Doctor Seymour H. Block. Spacey is being sued civilly for sex abuse.
Judge Kaplan: You are asking me to make an important decision, in a country that values public trials as much as we do, in the unique circumstance of a person who sued and also went to the press with it. In advance.
Plaintiffs lawyer: When my client gave the interview before this case. So there was no attempt to influence the jury. In fact, when my client spoke to the press this case would have been barred by the statute of limitations.
Judge Kaplan: But if disclosure would harm him, why did he go to the press? Plaintiff's lawyer: They did not reveal his name. Judge Kaplan: But he couldn't know it would work. The publication checked his account with others. There was a chance he would be ID-ed
Judge Kaplan: What's that case you're citing? Defense: Doe, 241 FRD 154, 159 (SDNY, 2006). And another one by Justice Brennan, about how public trials bring in more witnesses. CD made his decision. We have our due process rights. [He calls Spacey "Mr. Fowler"]
Judge Kaplan: On a proper showing, the pleadings need not contain the name of a party, no? Defense: They have to meet the Doe factors. And CD has not met his burden. Plaintiff: Doe v. Colgate, the plaintiff went to the press and was still anonymous.
Judge Kaplan: I'm going to wait until you make your expert disclosure. Plaintiff's lawyer: There is a person beyond Mr Rapp who is aware of this. And Mr Rapp is not seeking to withhold his name.
Judge Kaplan: You need to file the relevant piece of the deposition.
The proceeding ends, just like that.
From February 2: Spacey's lawyer says it is unfair for C.D. to proceeding anonymously. "While it is true we have C.D.'s name, only if we make it public can others come forward with evidence about him... this is the right to due process."
C.D.'s lawyer: The sealed plaintiff versus sealed defendant factors weigh in our favor. We are talking about the rape of a minor. The declaration by his therapist shows he would suffer harm if his name is made public.
Judge: If it happened it's abhorrent. But I don't have to be reminded of what Mr Spacey is accused of in every sentence. CD's lawyer: Spacey said, as to Rapp, that if it happened he was sorry. But here he is denying it entirely.
Judge: You're not getting anywhere.
Judge Kaplan: Get me your papers, and you'll get a decision promptly. Until then, don't disclose the name to third parties - except to Mr. Rapp, subject to sealing.
Spacey's lawyer: Every day is lost time.
So Rapp's deposition will go forward, with C.D.'s real name said at it but reported in the transcript as C.D.. Inner City Press will continue to report on this case. More on Patreon here.
The case is Rapp et al v. Fowler, 20-cv-9586 (Kaplan)
***
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.
