Lawyers for the Takeoff estate are asking a Los Angeles judge to dismiss a sexual assault lawsuit filed against the late Migos rapper, alleging the woman behind the case deleted potentially important text messages after taking legal action.
According to an October 29 report from MyNewsLA, attorneys representing Takeoff’s mother and estate filed a motion on October 27 requesting terminating sanctions against the plaintiff, identified in court documents as Jane Doe. The legal penalty could bring her civil lawsuit to an end without a trial.
The request centers on Doe’s October 14 deposition, during which attorneys claim she acknowledged deleting messages from her phone after filing the lawsuit in August 2020.
In court documents, the estate’s attorneys accuse Doe of having “systematically double-deleted her text messages relevant to this lawsuit,” arguing that the missing communications could have provided evidence supporting their defense.
The Takeoff estate also points to testimony allegedly given by one of Doe’s friends. According to the motion, that witness claimed the sexual assault allegations were fabricated with assistance from other friends who communicated with Doe through text messages.
Those accusations have not been established as facts by the court, and the reported testimony does not independently prove the original sexual assault allegations were fabricated.
Attorneys further argue that Doe intends to introduce selected portions of text conversations to support her claims while other exchanges involving the same individuals have been deleted. They contend that the missing conversations prevent the defense from reviewing the full context of those communications.
Made to order and shipped to your door.
The estate is asking Judge Huey P. Cotton to impose sanctions severe enough to dismiss the lawsuit.
The legal battle began in August 2020, when Doe accused Takeoff, whose real name was Kirsnick Khari Ball, of sexually assaulting her during a June 23 gathering at a home in Encino, California.
According to the original complaint, Doe attended the gathering after communicating with DJ Durel, whose real name is Daryl McPherson, a longtime collaborator of Migos.
She alleged that Takeoff repeatedly approached her throughout the night despite her rejecting his advances. After an interaction involving Takeoff and McPherson, Doe said she entered an upstairs bedroom to rest.
Her lawsuit alleged that Takeoff followed her into the room and sexually assaulted her despite her refusal to engage in sexual activity.
Doe also claimed she subsequently sought medical treatment, prompting hospital personnel to contact law enforcement. The allegations became the subject of a Los Angeles Police Department investigation.
Takeoff denied the accusations through his attorney, Drew Findling, who described them as “patently and provably false.”
In April 2021, the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office declined to pursue criminal charges, citing insufficient evidence. The decision did not resolve the separate civil lawsuit or establish whether the alleged assault occurred.
Doe’s attorney at the time, Neama Rahmani, criticized the decision and maintained that his client intended to pursue justice through the civil court system.
The Takeoff estate became involved in the litigation following the rapper’s death on November 1, 2022. The 28-year-old artist was fatally shot outside a Houston bowling alley.
In January 2023, Judge Cotton temporarily paused the civil proceedings while probate matters involving Takeoff’s assets were addressed in Georgia.
A Georgia probate judge subsequently appointed Takeoff’s mother as administrator of his estate. Doe also filed a $6 million creditor’s claim against the estate, according to MyNewsLA.
The latest motion could significantly affect whether Doe’s case proceeds. If the judge grants the requested terminating sanctions, her lawsuit could be dismissed based on the alleged destruction of evidence rather than a determination of the underlying sexual assault claims.
For now, the allegations against Takeoff remain unresolved in the civil proceedings, and the court has not ruled on the estate’s request for dismissal.
