By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Stand-up
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - Video
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Oct 17 – 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. [Then video here]
On October 6, 2022, the trail began. On the way in video I, II; afterward Space and Vlog. Here's the live tweeted thread by Inner City Press of the openings, here
On October 7, Day 2, with a stated victim of the Public Theater of Joe Papp, a Rapp friend who was told, and the beginning (direct) of Rapp himself. Thread here.
On October 11, Day 3, Rapp was on the stand all day, first on direct, then under cross examination, thread here.
On October 12, Day 4, Rapp was cross examined to the end - then under Rule 412, a courtroom closure. Thread here.
October 13 began with the news that Spacey's lawyer Jennifer Keller tested positive for COVID. It seemed the trial would be postponed - but, with instructions for testing Sunday and Tuesday, it proceeded, with Rapp's expert Roccio. Thread here.
On October 17, Kevin Spacey took the witness stand and said his father was a neo-Nazi and white supremacist - Inner City Press was there, thread here:
Before jury comes in, the scheduling: Spacey testimony will be today. Plaintiff (Rapp) has just rested his case. Spacey moves under Rule 50a for a judgment as a matter of law, will file memo "over the lunch hour."
Judge Kaplan: Over the lunch hour?
Spacey's lawyer: There was only incidental contact with the plaintiff's buttocks, even as told. It is plaintiff's burden to show that the claim-revival applies.
Judge Kaplan: I'm not going to grant that, at least now. The jury could infer it was for gratification
Rapp's lawyer: You are a 14 year old boy wriggling out from under a 26 year old man, who asks if he wants to stay. There was a battery and then this man [Spacey] pursued him
[Spacey's lawyer is quoting Judge Kaplan's ruling in Giuffre v. Prince Andrew back to him. But in this case, defense motion(s) not granted]
Judge Kaplan: I'm not going to grant that now. OK, bring the jury in. I'm going to tell them they'll get the case this week.
Judge Kaplan: We'll have the Barrowman deposition played, and then the defense's first witness, Mr. Spacey. Deposition (with Jennifer Keller) starts playing, stops. Judge Kaplan: Oh no.
[Barrowman was represented at the deposition by David Wright Tremaine LLP.] Barrowman: For the previous deposition I was in my flat in Cardiff, Wales where I film a show for iTV. It took 30 to 40 minutes. Q: When did you last speak to Mr. Rapp? Barrowman: 1998
Barrowman: I played Cole Porter's lover in a biopic. My sister and I have written a series of Y/A novels. There's also my first autobiography. Q: It's non-fiction, right. Barrowman: Yes, non-fiction.
Barrowman: I met Mr Rapp when he came to our school for the play Oliver. We would go out to Pop n' Fresh Pie. Q: Did you see Mr Rapp in NY? Barrowman: Yes. I stayed with him & his mother, & we went to see a play, after which we were in Jack Lemmon's dressing room
Barrowman: Then we went to the Limelight. I had vodka and tonic from a plastic cup. Q: In your book you say you drank vodka with Drew Barrymore. Barrowman: I was told she was in the club. Q: Did you see her? Barrowman: No. So what I wrote was an interpretation.
Q: Did Mr. Spacey touch you at the Limelight? Barrowman: Maybe on the dance floor we did something silly like dance the Bump. Then we went to see his place. It was a studio flat - sorry, I mean apartment. There was a bed.
Barrowman: You could see Jersey out the window. Anthony went to the bathroom and Kevin Spacey put his arm on me. I already knew I was gay. I was flattered that an older man was showing an interest in me. Q: You were 19. Barrowman: Yes.
Barrowman: Afterward I sent Mr. Spacey flowers. He somehow called my mother... Later I saw Anthony in London, he was doing "Rent." We had dinner and I told him what had happened with Kevin Spacey. And he said something happened a following weekend, he got laid on
OK, after a break, Defense: We call Kevin Spacey. Scolnick: Are Mr. Rapp's allegations true? Spacey: They aren't.
Scolnick: Mr Rapp has criticized you for being private about your sexual orientation. Have you been private about other things? Spacey: Yes. My family.
Spacey: "My father was a white supremacist and a neo-Nazi." Then my hatred of bigotry began. I was embarrassed to bring anyone home. My best friend in high school was Jewish. I couldn't bring him home.
Spacey: My mother loved movies and music. I liked to make her laugh. Then my father sent me to military school. I got kicked out for having too many fights. The school liked fights.
Judge Kaplan: Hold on
Spacey: My father would ask if I was gay, since I liked theater. He would use a hurtful word that begins with F. I had relationships with women as well. But so has Mr. Rapp. It's my choice. We have to respect that it is a difficult process.
Q: Did you do what Mr. Holtzman said you did? Spacey: No. Q: Mr. Holtzman says he recognized you from a program at the Public Theater. Were you on it? Spacey: No I was not.
Spacey: I was really determined I did not want to wait on tables. Rapp's lawyer: Objection!
Judge Kaplan: He's asking how he got a job at the Public Theater. Overruled. Spacey: I got past Dolores and Mr. Rapp said, Come on in. I told him my sob story. I was hired
Spacey: I had to get the car washed. I had to deliver the dry cleaning to his apartment on 10th Street. Q: Did you type letters for him? Spacey: I did. Q: Let me show you a letter-- Rapp's lawyer: Objection! Judge: Come to the sidebar. [Whispering]
Q: Tell me about the Save the Theaters campaign. Spacey: Mr. Papp worked to save two theaters - the Morosco and the Helen Hayes - from demolition for a hotel. The Honorable Thurgood Marshall issued a stay. Q: Were you photographed? Spacey: Yes.
Spacey: Later I became the pinch hitter for most parts in Hurly Burly. I was getting sued for not paying rent, all over Manhattan. Then I got the role in Long Day's Journey into Night. Then I got the apartment - the best thing about it was the view
Watch this site.
Back on September 17, Spacey through counsel filed a letter seeking to limit the anticipated testimony of Dr. Lisa M. Roccio - who also testified for the prosecution in US v. Ghislaine Maxwell: "Defendant Kevin Spacey Fowler (“Mr. Fowler”) will and hereby does move this Court, before the United States District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, located in the Federal Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007, on October 6, 2022, or a date to be set by the Court, for an order in limine to preclude plaintiff Anthony Rapp from offering expert testimony on credibility issues and other improper opinions of his expert witness, Lisa Rocchio, Ph.D. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 401-403, 701-702, and other applicable law, Mr. Fowler brings this motion to preclude Dr. Rocchio from testifying at trial about opinions or information that would invade the province of the jury and are otherwise inappropriate for expert opinion. Dr. Rocchio’s report includes opinions and conclusions that purport to opine on the credibility of Plaintiff and his allegations, as well as the purported corroboration of other evidence. This is plainly improper. Dr. Rocchio also provides impermissible expert opinions constituting legal conclusions and a narrative description of hearsay statements of which she has no personal knowledge. Relatedly, Plaintiff’s counsel should be precluded from asking questions of Mr. Fowler’s rebuttal witness, Alexander Bardey, M.D., about credibility issues, including without limitation allegations of unrelated alleged misconduct of Mr. Fowler. Dr. Bardey was not designated to opine about credibility issues or anything to do with a psychological evaluation of Mr. Fowler. Nor was Dr. Rocchio. And other allegations of sexual misconduct are entirely irrelevant to either expert’s opinion. Finally, Mr. Fowler seeks an order precluding Dr. Rocchio from testifying at trial about any opinions not stated by her in her report or at her deposition." Full letter on Patreon here.
On September 9, in the run up to the October 6 trial, Spacey through counsel indicated he wants to make public Rapp's sexual history. From his filing: "I write to inform Your Honor that Mr. Fowler will be filing a motion in limine that bears on the Court’s consideration of Plaintiff’s objections to transcript designations submitted on September 8, 2022." Complete filing on Patreon here.
Back on June 6, Judge Kaplan issued two orders: one dismissing Rapp's first cause of action but not the rest of the complaint, the second denying his motion for remand (argued below). The first order recounts Rapp's allegation that when he was 14, Spacey put him back down on a bed, "grazing" his buttocks. Order on Patreon here.
On August 25, this: "TRIAL ORDER: The Clerks Office is scheduled to provide the Court a jury panel for this case on Thursday. October 6, 2022. On that day, the parties must be present in Courtroom 21B by 9:30 AM ready to begin jury selection and proceed immediately to trial. You are instructed to take the following steps in connection with the trial as further set forth in this Order. ( Jury Selection set for 10/6/2022 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 21B, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Lewis A. Kaplan.) (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 8/25/22)."
As to jury selection, Judge Kaplan on September 7 ordered, "ORDER. Consistent with the Rule, the Court will examine prospective jurors, as it does in all cases, and will take the parties' helpful joint questionnaire into consideration in formulating its own examination. Upon conclusion of the Court's examination, it will afford counsel adequate opportunity to suggest additional questions and ask any that the Court considers proper. The request to have prospective jurors complete a written questionnaire in writing is denied. Among other reasons, it agrees that "jurors tend[] to understand written questions differently from those who draft[] the questions, leading to substantial difficulty in parsing their responses." United States v. Treacy, 639 F.3d 32, 47 (2d Cir. 2011). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 9/7/22)."
Back on August 9, Judge Kaplan ruled: "Fowler's motion to compel is GRANTED to the extent that it seeks (a) production of Vary's pre-2017 communications with Rapp, 2021 communications with Darlow Smithson Productions, and documents regarding any interactions between Vary and Fowler and (b) a supplemental deposition. Vary shall sit for a supplemental deposition not to exceed four hours and answer, to the extent consistent with this Memorandum Opinion, all questions he refused to answer at his initial deposition and all reasonable follow up questions and questions about or relating to the newly produced documents and matters disclosed therein. The documents shall be produced no later than August 15, 2022. The supplemental deposition shall take place on a date mutually acceptable to Vary and the parties, which shall be on or before September 9, 2022."
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."
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.
On May 27 Vary's counsel filed another letter, including "nearly all of the materials contain unpublished newsgathering information that we maintain is privileged and shielded from production, but we acknowledge was not provided or obtained subject to promises of confidentiality. However, there are a handful of source names and information that was provided pursuant to promises of confidentiality. Our understanding is that the confidential sources corroborate Mr. Rapp’s account, but do not want to have their information exposed. Although we maintain that both non-confidential and confidential unpublished newsgathering materials are privileged and shielded from disclosure, there are special protections and considerations for confidential source materials." Full letter on Patreon here.
On June 7, Judge Kaplan offered this secord clarification: "ORDER denying [23 in 22-mc-0063] Letter Motion for Discovery; denying [24 in 22-mc-0063] Letter Motion for Discovery. On May 19, 2022, this Court ordered that Mr. Vary submit, under seal, for in camera review various materials that he may be withholding from production in order to inform its analysis of whether he has satisfied his burden of showing that the materials, if indeed there are any, should be produced to the defendant. On June I, 2022 it granted in part Mr. Vary's request for additional time within which to comply. (The May 19 and June I orders are referred to collectively as the "Orders.") Mr. Vary now seeks a stay of the Orders insofar as they (I) require the submission for in camera review of any withheld materials that contain what he calls "confidential source information" and (2) supposedly require such submission of "post-subpoena attorney-client communications." Dkt. 23. The proposed stay, if granted, would remain in effect for "14 days after the later of the following events: (a) the Court's ruling on Mr. Fowler's motion for summary judgment; and (b) the Court's ruling on Mr. Rapp's renewed motion to remand. Dkt 159, 172, 20-cv-09586." Id. The ostensible justification for this relief is to afford Mr. Vary's counsel additional time to "consider and possibly seek appellate review of those portions of the Court's Orders, and then, if Mr. Vary does seek appellate review, stay [the Orders] until the outcome of such review."
That 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.
