On December 21, 2024, Detroit‐area inmate Derrick Lee Cardello‑Smith filed a $400 million civil lawsuit against Sean “P. Diddy” Combs, alleging a 1997 sexual assault at a Holiday Inn. In a widely circulated court filing, Cardello‑Smith named Jennifer Lynn Lopez—known professionally as J.Lo—as a potential key witness, citing her romantic relationship with Combs from 1999 to 2001 . This revelation sent shockwaves through entertainment circles and reignited public interest in Combs’ long‑shadowed legal history.

Who is Derrick Lee Cardello‑Smith?

Background: A Michigan prisoner, Cardello‑Smith is serving sentences for sexual misconduct and kidnapping.

Allegations: He claims Combs drugged him at a private party, then sexually assaulted him at a Detroit hotel in 1997 .

 

 

Witness Outreach: The lawsuit asserts Lopez may have crucial knowledge, requesting her testimony under oath. Cardello‑Smith’s filing even refers to her formally: “Jennifer Lynn Lopez aka Jenny from the Block” .

Relief Sought: He is seeking $400 million in punitive and compensatory damages .

 

 

Why Lopez? What Could She Add?

Past Relationship: Lopez and Combs dated from 1999 to 2001—two years after the alleged 1997 incident .

1999 Club Incident: Lopez and Combs were arrested following a shooting at Club New York in December 1999. Though she was not charged, she was detained for 14 hours, and Combs later faced gun charges .

 

 

Potential Firsthand Knowledge: A legal analyst, Pete Gleason, told In Touch Weekly that Lopez’s presence during that 1999 incident puts her in line to be called as a witness, since she fled in the same vehicle as Combs—possibly holding critical details .

 

 

 

Legal Context: Statute of Limitations & Precedents

Time Barrier: Civil lawsuits about crimes two decades old typically face dismissal due to statutes of limitation. Combs’ lawyers have countered Cardello‑Smith’s suit as “frivolous” and legally barred .

 

 

Pattern Claims: Cardello‑Smith argues prior incidents—like the infamous nightclub incident—can demonstrate a pattern of wrongdoing, thereby justifying his claims .

Combs’ Defense: His legal team labels the lawsuit a concoction by a litigant “with an overactive imagination,” dismissed by courts as contrived and time‑barred .

 

 

Lopez’s Position: Silent to Date

No public statement from Lopez or her team regarding the lawsuit.

Tabloids reported she ignored paparazzi questions after screenings and dinners, notably distancing herself from the controversy .

While paparazzi commentary noted her discomfort, no admissions or denials were made .

 

 

Rumors & Speculation on Social Media

Reddit threads illustrate how public suspicion and rumours swirl online:

“In December of 1999 … Jennifer Lopez had a gun in her purse. … JLo put the gun back in her purse and carried it out of the club.”

“I don’t think all of them will be flipped by the feds. … She covered her own ass! She and Diddy broke up super quick after this.”

“Probably why Ben split with her …”

Other threads speculate she might simply testify if subpoenaed—but highlight lack of clarity on whether she witnessed anything beyond routine presence .

Legal Crosswinds: Multiple Lawsuits & Trials

Jennifer Lopez’s potential involvement arises amid several connected legal battles:

Cardello‑Smith’s civil suit (1997): $400 million, plans to subpoena Lopez .

LaTroya Grayson’s suit (2006): $15 million suit alleging Combs drugged and assaulted her in 2006 .

Rodney “Lil Rod” Jones suit: New allegations tied to the 1999 shooting, including claims Combs boasted of using Lopez to smuggle a gun .

 

 

 

Federal criminal charges: RICO, sex trafficking, prostitution; Diddy was found guilty on two counts in July 2025, after trial that included testimony spanning these events .

 

 

 

What Could Lopez Testify About?

A few focused angles:

1997 Assault?: As Lopez and Combs began dating in 1999, her knowledge of events in 1997 is likely limited. A civil suit naming her suggests Cardello‑Smith believes she might know of a cover-up or remark by Combs , but the connection is tenuous due to the timeline gap.

1999 Gun Incident: Lopez was present at the shooting night—could testify about her and Combs’ actions, who had the gun, who fled, and what happened immediately after .

 

 

 

Personal Relationship Insight: As Combs’ partner, Lopez may be privy to his character, unique attitudes, or threats. This could factor into tying disparate allegations together in court.

However, Combs’ team seeks to suppress evidence of past incidents to isolate the claim at hand—reducing the chance Lopez’s testimony is legally permissible .

Legal Obstacles for the Plaintiff

Cardello‑Smith faces two major hurdles:

Statute of limitations: 1997 is nearly 30 years ago—many jurisdictions bar civil suits over such an old event.

Combs’ suppression motions: His attorneys argue events from 1999 or earlier are irrelevant to the alleged 1997 assault and would prejudice the trial .

 

 

 

Witness credibility: Jared’s convictions and motive—self‑interest, potential retaliation fears—might be challenged in court. Combs’ team has attempted to invalidate the default judgment on these grounds .

 

 

Public Reaction: A Sidelined Eye

The public is deeply interested—both due to Lopez and Diddy’s A‑list status.

Many fans dismiss the link between Lopez and an alleged 1997 assault, viewing it as opportunistic and unsubstantiated.

Others argue past episodes (1999 club shooting) already establish her close proximity to Combs’ darker side—she could legally be compelled to speak.

 

 

Some question why Lopez hasn’t responded more forcefully—no firm statement, defense, or refutation—as pressures mount .

 

 

What Happens Next?

Legal motions: Combs’ attorneys are likely to seek to strike Lopez from witness lists, arguing irrelevance and prejudice.

Subpoena or dismissal: If the court permits, Lopez might be subpoenaed during the civil trial—if and only if the judge determines her testimony is directly relevant.

 

 

Status updates: As of July 2025, no subpoena has been issued publicly, and Lopez remains silent. No hearing dates involving her have been set.

 

Conclusion

Credible?: While Cardello‑Smith formally names Lopez as a witness, nothing suggests she’s accused of wrongdoing.

Likely to testify?: Currently unlikely—legal barriers loom, and her potential role is indirect.

Impact: But the story highlights how celebrity associations can prolong legal battles—and why past relationships may legally entangle stars even years later.

 

 

As Combs’ criminal case has advanced—culminating in convictions for prostitution-related charges—civil suits persist, with Lopez now unintentionally at the intersection of tabloid fascination and legal strategy.