| Kevin Spacey
Charged With Raping Rapp Keeps Civil Trial
in SDNY After Praising Baltimore
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
October 4 Spacey asked to seal the UK High
Court's Order which, he says, orders him to
destroy material by October 7. Full letter on
Patreon here.
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.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA
Mail: Box 20047, Dag
Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017
Reporter's mobile (and weekends):
718-716-3540
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2021 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|
,
