Inner City Press

In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYTAzerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

These reports are usually available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis

Share |   

Follow on TWITTER

Home -

These reports are usually available through Google News and on Lexis-Nexis


(FP Twitterati 100, 2013)

ICP on YouTube

More: InnerCityPro
Sept 24, 2013

UN: Sri Lanka


FOIA Finds  

Google, Asked at UN About Censorship, Moved to Censor the Questioner, Sources Say, Blaming UN - Update - Editorial

Support this work by buying this book

Click on cover for secure site orders

also includes "Toxic Credit in the Global Inner City"




Bank Beat

Freedom of Information

How to Contact Us

In Kevin Spacey Trial Rapp Cites Weinstein and Me Too While Keller Mocks His Low CD Sales

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Stand-up
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - Video

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Oct 11 – 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.

OK - in Kevin Spacey trial, Anthony Rapp is still on the stand on direct examination.

Rapp's lawyer: I want to direct your attention back to Precious Sons, and how Ed Harris held you in that play. Was it similar to how Kevin Spacey picked you up, like a bride?

Rapp: With Ed Harris, it was loving, nothing sexual about it.

Rapp's lawyer: When if ever did Ed Harris grind his pelvis into you? Rapp: Never.

 Rapp's lawyer: When if ever did you feel Ed Harris was trying to get with you sexually?

Spacey's lawyer: Objection! Relevance.

 Judge: Sustained. Rapp's lawyer: Where did you go next? Rapp: Interlochen, the rigorous music camp. 

Rapp's lawyer: When did it come back to you? Rapp: I went to see "Working Girl" in my local cinema, and saw him on the screen and it was like someone poked me with a cattle prod.

 Rapp's lawyer: Have you watched others of his films? Rapp: Usual Suspects, LA Confidential, American Beauty...

Rapp's lawyer: Why did you go to them? Rapp: I am an actor. I felt it was part of my job to go see them. I steeled myself and tamped it down

 Rapp's lawyer: Have you seen Kevin Spacey in a play? Rapp: Yes, Lost in Yonkers. Rapp's lawyer: And television?

Rapp: Only on award shows. Rapp's lawyer: Did you attend Oscar parties? Rapp: Yes, at Elizabeth Law's on the Upper East Side.

 Rapp's lawyer: What about you throwing pencils at the screen, as was brought up earlier in the trial?

Rapp: Elizabeth use to throw a rubber chicken at the screen. I threw a pencil, my version. I had watch the Oscars since I was a kid.

 Rapp: I was at an event, in a large bathroom, and Kevin Spacey walked in. It was startling to be in his gaze. I wanted to get out. I went out.

Rapp's lawyer: Anthony, have you ever written a tell-all book?

Rapp: Not a tell-all. A memoir of love, focused only on the time I was in Rent, the workshop production, the off-Broadway, my mother - a three year period is the main thrust

 Rapp's lawyer: When did you mother give up her career for yours?

Rapp: She only put it on pause until she went back to Joliet... Once when I was 13, she slapped me. I said, I will slap you back. Then the next year in NY, she came in and slapped me. I slapped back

Rapp's lawyer: Did you fight with a boyfriend? Rapp: Yes, Josh Safron. We were in an alleyway by the theater, a Sunday in July. He said, Never talk to me again. I saw red and I launched myself at him and knocked him down.

 Rapp's lawyer: What did you do after that fight?

Spacey's lawyer: Objection to the characterization as a fight.

 Judge: Sustained. Rapp's lawyer: After the altercation -- Spacey's lawyer: Objection. Judge: Sustained.

 Rapp's lawyer: When you get the interviews about these events, what concerns did you have? Rapp: I had already told my producers and the PR people of Startrek DIscovery I was contemplating doing this. I was aware Kevin Spacey was in the middle of House of Cards

Rapp's lawyer: Did you want a career like Kevin Spacey's? Rapp: No, I was fine with what I had. I could be picky about projects... I read about Me Too & Harvey Weinstein, I identified with it

Rapp's lawyer: How has the case been? Rapp: I was in line to enter the building this morning and Kevin Spacey was there. It was hard to breathe.

  Rapp's lawyer: When if ever have you regretted bringing this lawsuit? Spacey's lawyer: Objection Judge: Sustained

 Rapp: I brought this lawsuit hoping I could help protect others. Judge Kaplan: Strike that last remark.  [Rapp drinks from bottle of water, closes his eyes]

 Rapp's lawyer: No further questions. Judge: We'll take a break.

 Jury entering! Judge Kaplan: Cross-examination. Ms. Keller. Spacey's lawyer Keller: This is the article where you went public, right? Rapp: Yes.

Keller: You decided in a quiet moment by the window, yes? Rapp: What do you mean? Keller: You said that.

Keller: Lupita Nyong'o is a legitimate star, right? Rapp: Yes.  

Keller: She had a meteoric rise, correct? Rapp: Yes. Keller: Let's look at your deposition. You said you were moved. True? Rapp: I was.

 Rapp's lawyer: Can she read the whole question? Judge Kaplan: I'll read it... No, move on. Keller: You got an award for accusing Mr. Spacey, yes? Rapp's lawyer: Objection, relevance. Keller: I can make an offer of proof. Judge Kaplan: Not necessary. Overruled.

 Keller: You wrote to Vary of Buzzfeed that you wanted to expose someone powerful but do it in the best way, right?

Rapp: Can I see that? Keller: Yes. And this was before the op-ed by  Ms. Nyong'o - five days before, Vary told you Buzzfeed wanted you to have impact

 Keller: So in the article, you claim Mr. Spacey picked you and Mr. Barrowman out and invited you to the Limelight clubs, right? Rapp's lawyer: Objection - misstates the evidence. Judge Kaplan: Overruled.

 Keller: You didn't tell Mr. Vary one word about Jack Lemmon that night, did you? Rapp: I don't know that for certain. Keller: Do you think night clubs in NYC are fully going at 8 pm?

Rapp: I had no way to know at the time. Keller: How old are you now? Rapp: 50. Keller: And you don't know when things start? Rapp: I haven't been to a club in a while.

Keller: You told Vary that it was fun at the Limelight, yes?

Rapp: I did. The conversation was good, but at the club, I couldn't hear.  Keller: So it was fun, or it was unpleasant - which one?

Keller: Mr. Spacey was flirting with Mr. Barrowman, right? Rapp: I don't recall. Keller: You claim only you were invited to the party at Mr. Spacey's apartment, yes? Rapp: That's my recollection.

Keller: You say your made your way safely home - was danger lurking? Rapp: I wouldn't say that. Keller: But you did, in your deposition on page 37, lines 18 to 24.

 Keller: Mr. Barrowman says Mr. Spacey had a dog, a brown lab - and you've never mentioned it, right? Rapp: I do not remember a brown dog.

 Judge Kaplan: Ms, Keller, how much more do you have? Keller: Quite a bit. Judge: Jurors may take a break. Thread will continue.

OK - they're back. Keller: Let's talk more about Mr. Barrowman. You went radio silence with him?

Rapp: We weren't close friends. Judge: Answer the question. You know what radio silence is. Rapp: It sounds intentional. Judge: I'm not going to quibble with you

 Keller: In your book, you say you were growing restless with your mother's presence, right? Rapp: Only during rehearsals.

Keller: Come on, wasn't it because your brother was molested by her boyfriend? Rapp: I wasn't aware of that then. Keller: You say that at Mr. Spacey's, when you went into be bedroom, David Letterman was on TV, right?

Rapp: Yes. Keller: And he had the Late Night Show? Rapp: I don't know what it was called.

 Keller: The first time you were really questioned about your Kevin Spacey story was in your deposition in this case, right? Rapp: No. Vary questioned me. Keller: Your good friend, who said he would leave things vague so Mr. Spenser could not rebut - that friend?

 Keller: So when Mr. Spacey's body was on you, he didn't touch your p*nis, did he?

Rapp: No. Keller: He didn't try to get you to touch his, did he? Rapp: He did not. Keller: How long was he on top? Rapp: It was a frozen moment for me. Keller: That's not my question

Keller: And when you tried to leave, you're saying Mr. Spacey was at the door, right? Rapp: Yes. Keller: But you don't know how he got there... I know you're on Star Trek Discovery, but you're not alleging he used a transporter, are you? Break taken.

 They're back. Keller: Buzzfeed  reported that you wanted to shout, This guy is a fraud, right? Rapp: Is that in the article? Keller: Yes. You thought he was portraying himself as straight, correct? Rapp: Yes.

Keller: You called yourself queer? Rapp: Yes.

Keller: Did you end a relationship with a boyfriend because he wouldn't come out as gay?

 Rapp: May I explain? It was because he would not be photographed with me at an event for the play "Rent" Keller: Because that would out him, right? Rapp: Yes.

 Keller: Kevin Spacey's star rose, and you were having trouble getting media attention, true? Rapp: When are you referring to?

Keller: 1996 and onward. Rapp: That is not accurate. Keller: Kevin Spacey was in L.A. Confidential, and you went to see him in it? Rapp: Yes

Keller: When you put out a CD and went to sell it on a college campus, you sold only 26 CDs, right?

Rapp: Did I say "only"? Judge Kaplan: Are you saying that selling 26 CDs after a concert is a success? Rapp: At that concert, yes.

Keller: You were in "You're a Good Man, Charlie Brown." You couldn't claim that's in the same league at The Iceman Cometh, right? Rapp: They are different kinds of shows.

Judge Kaplan: We'll break here.

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 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."

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.

Feedback: Editorial [at]
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]