Singer Kesha denied drug, sex claims against producer 3 years ago | entertainment | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Mar 25, 2017-Saturday
New Delhi
  • Humidity
  • Wind

Singer Kesha denied drug, sex claims against producer 3 years ago

entertainment Updated: Oct 22, 2014 14:52 IST


Pop singer


said in a deposition three years ago, unsealed on Tuesday, that music producer Dr. Luke never had sex with her nor gave her drugs in the latest salvo in the legal battle between the long-time music partners.

An attorney for Dr. Luke, whose legal name is Lukasz Gottwald, successfully asked a New York state judge to unseal portions of the depositions which stem from a 2010 lawsuit brought by Kesha's former manager against the singer and producer.

The statements contradict the Die Young singer's lawsuit filed last week accusing the pop hit-maker of forcing Kesha, whose legal name is Kesha Sebert, to "take drugs and alcohol in order to take advantage of her sexually."

The lawsuit alleges the producer drugged and raped the singer.

Kesha's attorney, Mark Geragos, said the 27-year-old singer was ambiguous in the deposition and had been threatened by Dr. Luke if she ever mentioned the alleged sexual assault to anyone.

"She goes into rehab and she goes into therapy and she's able to stand strong now," Geragos said, adding that the questions about drugs and sex with the producer prove that she had spoken to her former manager about them.

In the 2011 deposition, Kesha said she didn't know if Dr. Luke, who has produced hits for the likes of Katy Perry and Miley Cyrus, had given her "drugs which could not be purchased at a pharmacy" and said the two never had an intimate relationship.

Kesha and Dr. Luke, 41, unleashed dueling lawsuits a week ago, trading accusations of abuse and extortion as Kesha sued Dr. Luke to get out of her record contract with the producer.

She has been under contract to him since 2005. Dr. Luke countersued in New York, accusing Kesha and her mother, Pebe Sebert, of defamation, breach of contract and contractual interference.