{"id":219560,"date":"2026-10-02T13:45:24","date_gmt":"2026-10-02T20:45:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.shockya.com\/news\/?p=219560"},"modified":"2026-10-02T13:45:31","modified_gmt":"2026-10-02T20:45:31","slug":"jay-z-keeps-losing-to-buzbee-rehearing-denied-in-13-year-old-girl-rape-case-again","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shockya.com\/news\/2026\/10\/02\/jay-z-keeps-losing-to-buzbee-rehearing-denied-in-13-year-old-girl-rape-case-again\/","title":{"rendered":"Jay-Z Keeps Losing to Buzbee: Rehearing Denied in “13-Year-Old Girl” Rape Case (Again)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/a>
Shawn Carter, AKA Jay-Z. (Murad Merali)<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

LOS ANGELES<\/strong>\u00a0\u2014 The California Court of Appeal<\/strong> on Thursday denied Shawn Carter’s petition<\/strong> for rehearing in his extortion and defamation suit against Tony Buzbee<\/strong>, three weeks after affirming the case’s dismissal<\/strong> and one week after Carter <\/strong>told the court that Buzbee’s former client had recanted under oath,\u00a0Bloomberg Law reported<\/a>. The declaration drew immediate suspicion.<\/strong> In court papers, Buzbee’s side<\/strong> called it “bought-and-paid-for,” <\/strong>and the questions since have been whether Jane Doe was paid, pressured or threatened into signing it.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The order modifies the panel’s Sept. 9 opinion without changing its judgment.<\/strong> It adds one sentence: nothing in the opinion prevents the trial court from opening new discovery. That is the whole of what Carter <\/strong>got for a 12-page declaration, a dismissed defendant and a petition calling the declaration “explosive new evidence”<\/strong> that should let his “meritorious claims to proceed.”<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The case has been dogged by controversy from the start. Jane Doe<\/strong> alleged in her complaint that she was told Carter was threatening to kill her unless she dropped the suit. <\/strong>Four days before the anti-SLAPP hearing<\/strong>, investigators working “indirectly” for Carter showed up at her home in Alabama<\/strong> and secretly recorded her<\/strong>, a visit the trial judge excluded and the appeals court called out by name. Her dismissal came only after Carter promised that neither he nor his agents would contact her again.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n