Taylor Swift Must Face Alleged Groping DJ in Colorado Court

June 1, 2017

3360

Summary: In August, pop star Taylor Swift will face a Denver DJ, who allegedly groped her at a meet-and-greet.

Taylor Swift may publicly be ignoring Katy Perry’s diss track “Swish Swish,” but in August, she won’t be able to ignore a Colorado DJ whom she claimed groped her. On Wednesday, a federal judge ruled that she must be in attendance at a jury trial that will settle the case once and for all.

In 2015, KYGO radio DJ David Mueller sued Swift, 27, for causing him to be wrongfully terminated. He said that she had mistakenly believed he had groped her at a concert meet-and-greet in 2013, and that one of his bosses was probably the real offender.

Swift claimed that she knew Mueller was the pervert, and in response to his lawsuit, she filed a countersuit, wanting a trial. She said that during the grope, Mueller had lifted up her skirt.

“Right as the moment came for us to pose for the photo, he took his hand and put it up my dress and grabbed onto my ass cheek, and no matter how much I scooted over, it was still there,” Swift said during a deposition. “It was completely intentional, I’ve never been so sure of anything in my life.”

Swift claimed that there was a photo of the incident she described. TMZ released the aforementioned picture in 2016, which Swift had originally wanted to remain sealed as it could influence the trial. In the photo, Swift is posed next to Mueller who appeared to have his hand on her butt but it is unclear about the raised skirt. (See below.)

This week, U.S. District Court Judge William Martinez in Colorado said that he will hear both stories during a nine-day jury trial on August 7.

“Having reviewed these evidentiary materials, the Court finds that the central and genuine dispute remains,” Martinez said, according to The Hollywood Reporter. “Certain witnesses’ testimony tends to corroborate Swift’s version of events, and Mueller points to other evidence that he argues shows inconsistencies in Swift’s story. None of this changes the reality that if a jury accepts Mueller’s version of the facts, then it must substantially reject Swift’s version, and vice versa. In ruling on summary judgment, it is not the Court’s role to resolve this dispute.”

Mueller had also sued Swift for slander, but the judge threw that charge out and allowed his other allegations to move forward.

“Put another way, Mueller asks the Court to treat his slander claims as ‘counter-counterclaims,’ responsive to Swift’s assault and battery claims,” Judge Martinez wrote. “[T]he Court rejects Mueller’s interpretation because it would invite undue litigation gamesmanship, allowing parties to file successive rounds of ‘revived’ counter- claims, counter-counterclaims, counter-counter-counterclaims, etc., even they were asserted further and further outside the applicable limitations period. That perverse result would be contrary to the recognized purposes of enforcing limitations periods.”

When filing her countersuit, Swift said that any money awarded to her would be donated to a women’s charity.

Judge Martinez has ordered both parties to appear during all days of the August trial.