Druski’s name has reemerged in federal court filings after attorney Ariel Mitchell accused him and his legal team of misleading the judge about crucial evidence in an ongoing civil case allegedly tied to Sean “Diddy” Combs.
According to new court documents, Mitchell claims Druski’s team falsely identified the owner of a phone used to establish his alibi during an alleged 2018 assault in California. She alleges that the defense told the court the device belonged to his mother, when records now show it was registered under his grandmother’s name.
Mitchell argues that the detail could undermine the earlier ruling that placed Druski in Georgia, not California, on the night of the alleged assault. “The court relied on a misleading narrative about which number was his,” Mitchell wrote in her motion, adding that the confusion may have unfairly shaped the judge’s decision to sanction her legal team.
The case stems from Ashley Parham’s lawsuit accusing Diddy and several others of sexual assault during a 2018 party near Orinda, California. Parham later named Druski, whose real name is Drew Desbordes, claiming he participated in the alleged assault. Druski has repeatedly denied all accusations.
In response to Parham’s claims, Druski’s lawyers presented phone and bank records that appeared to prove he was in Georgia at the time. Judge Rita F. Lin deemed the evidence convincing and warned Parham’s attorneys that continuing to press charges against Druski “appears to lack any reasonable basis.”
Mitchell’s latest motion seeks to overturn potential sanctions against her and reopen discovery to further investigate Druski’s movements that night. She argues that if the phone data was tied to another family member, it weakens the location evidence used in his defense.
Mitchell remains active in several other high-profile lawsuits connected to Diddy, including one representing Making The Band alum Sara Rivers, and previously represented Adria English in a separate New York case. Meanwhile, Diddy has filed his own $100 million defamation suit against Mitchell, Nexstar Media Group, and journalist Courtney Burgess over televised claims involving alleged sex tapes.
As of now, the court has not issued a ruling on Mitchell’s request for reconsideration, leaving both sides waiting for the next move in a case that continues to draw national attention.