A woman who accused American rapper Jay-Z of sexual assault has filed a sworn declaration admitting that her allegations were entirely false. The 12-page document, submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on Thursday, 24 September 2026, confirms that she has never met or spoken to the artist.
The woman, previously referred to in legal documents as Jane Doe, stated under penalty of perjury that she was “entirely mistaken” in identifying the rapper, whose real name is Shawn Carter. She apologised for the “immense pain and suffering” the claims had caused.
The original lawsuit, filed in 2024, alleged that an assault took place in 2000 when the accuser was 13 years old. That case was dismissed with prejudice by a judge in February 2025. Following the dismissal, Mr Carter launched a malicious prosecution lawsuit against the woman and her legal team.
Mistaken identification
In her recent declaration, the woman explained that the false allegations were triggered by a Facebook advertisement regarding Sean “Diddy” Combs. She claimed the advert sparked “repressed memories” which led her to believe Mr Carter was involved. She now clarifies that those specific claims, including those involving Mr Combs in her original suit, were false.
According to The Guardian, the woman’s new legal representative, James Blair Newman Jr., stated that his client received no financial compensation or settlement in exchange for the retraction. The filing was made independently to correct the record after she previously stood by the claims in a 2024 television interview.
Ongoing legal action against lawyers
Following the formal retraction, legal representatives for Jay-Z have moved to dismiss the woman as a defendant in his ongoing malicious prosecution case. However, the rapper is continuing his legal action against her former lawyers, including high-profile American attorney Tony Buzbee.
The retraction concludes a significant chapter of a high-profile international legal battle. Mr Carter’s legal team had consistently maintained that the allegations were a “shakedown” attempt. The case continues in the Manhattan federal court against the remaining defendants, focusing on the professional conduct of the legal teams involved in the initial filing.
