Kevin Spacey Charged With Raping Rapp Says It Was Only Child Abuse As Maxwell Trial Is Cited
Rapp's lawyer said Spacey raped "from country to country" - echo of Epstein's, Maxwell's, Spacey's & Clinton's 2002 trip to Africa from which attendance at GMas trial is banned by Omicron - letter in
By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - ESPN
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Dec 9 – 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 February 2 U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Lewis A. Kaplan held a proceeding. Inner City Press live tweeted it, here and below.
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:
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.
Rapp's lawyer: From coast to coast, from country to country, Kevin Spacey leaves a trail of young boys and men who say he touched them without their consent. He just lost an arbitration to Netflix about House of Cards.
Rapp's lawyer: I am haunted at not convincing the court to allow C.D. to go anonymous, as is being allowed in a major criminal case now in our court, of Ghislaine Maxwell. But here, C.D. dropped out.
Rapp's lawyer: Here, Spacey's lawyer is arguing that throwing a 14 year-old boy on the bed and getting on top of him is not sexual, it's just child abuse. It's absurd. We want to depose Evan Lowenstein. He became Mr. Spacey's traveling companion.
Rapp's lawyer: Evan Lowenstein's wife has gotten an order of protection against Mr Spacey being with her children, as I understand it. Judge: And this summation is relevant how?
Judge: What if we limit you to examining incidents where the identity of the other person has become public and the person was under 18?
Rapp's lawyer: Even if a person was over 18, throwing them on the bed and jumping on top of them is relevant
Rapp's lawyer: I don't intend to ask Mr. Spacey, at deposition, Tell me every person you've had sex with.
Judge Kaplan: You've called my approach perverse. Frankly, it's not welcome.
Rapp's lawyer: I was not calling you perverse.
Judge: I'm going to reserve but you will have something very quickly. Lawyer: We have Lowenstein's depo on Tuesday.
Judge: You'll have something from me by then. Inner City Press will stay on it - now 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.