Listen to the article
Former Fiancé of Rep. Nancy Mace Files Lawsuit Denying Sexual Assault Allegations
Patrick Bryant, the former fiancé of U.S. Representative Nancy Mace, filed a lawsuit Thursday claiming that sexual assault allegations referenced by the congresswoman in a House speech earlier this year were fabricated. The legal action marks the latest development in an increasingly contentious dispute that has spilled into public view.
Bryant’s lawsuit directly challenges claims made in a May filing by an anonymous “Jane Doe,” who alleged she was sexually assaulted at the home of Eric Bowman while Bryant and Bowman recorded the incident. These allegations were referenced by Rep. Mace during her February speech on the House floor, where she called Bryant a “sexual predator.”
In his countersuit, Bryant portrays himself as the victim of a conspiracy, claiming Rep. Mace worked with Bowman’s estranged wife to fabricate the assault allegations. According to court documents, Bryant alleges the congresswoman invented the story as leverage to blackmail him during their relationship troubles.
The lawsuit states that Doe, who reportedly worked for Bryant years earlier, filed her May lawsuit based on false information provided by Mace. Bryant’s filing details that Mace suspected him of infidelity during their relationship and allegedly attempted to hack his phone to find evidence.
Court documents further allege that Mace told a political consultant she intended to use images from Bryant’s phone to gain ownership of their jointly-held properties. However, Bryant claims she never mentioned sex trafficking or gang rape during these conversations.
Regarding the alleged October 2018 incident, Bryant denies that he or any other men assaulted Doe after she reportedly fell into a pool at a party. The lawsuit acknowledges that Bowman’s estranged wife later claimed to have witnessed the alleged assault through a home security system but notes she did not mention anything to Doe that night.
Bryant’s lawsuit specifically accuses Mace and Bowman’s wife of meeting to “conspire to frame and defraud” him and two others before “setting out to find a victim.” The legal action seeks damages for defamation, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
Rep. Mace responded forcefully to the lawsuit in a statement, saying, “It’s almost as if Patrick Bryant is asking to write me another check. I just got him sanctioned in court. And rape victim Jane Doe and I are still waiting on him to pay our legal fees after he weaponized the court against us.”
Mace’s reference to sanctions relates to a court order issued just six days ago involving Bryant’s legal representation. The order determined that Bryant’s company and his lawyer violated South Carolina state law by issuing subpoenas and deposing individuals without proper court approval in the Jane Doe case.
The legal battle unfolds amid heightened national attention to sexual assault allegations and the #MeToo movement, particularly in political contexts. Rep. Mace, who represents South Carolina’s 1st congressional district, has previously spoken publicly about being a sexual assault survivor herself.
This case highlights the complex intersections of personal relationships, political figures, and serious allegations that often play out in both courtrooms and the court of public opinion. Legal experts note that defamation cases involving public figures like Mace typically face a higher standard of proof under U.S. law.
As the litigation proceeds, both parties will likely face intense scrutiny from constituents in Mace’s district and from political observers nationwide. The congressman’s office has not indicated whether she plans to file additional legal responses beyond her initial statement.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
9 Comments
Lawsuits and counter-claims like this can get messy. It’s important to let the legal system work through the evidence and details objectively. I’d caution against rushing to judgment on either side without knowing all the facts.
Allegations of sexual assault should always be taken seriously, but fabricated claims can also do real harm. I’ll reserve judgment here until the courts have thoroughly examined the evidence on both sides.
Cases like this highlight how difficult it can be to determine the truth when there are competing narratives. I’ll be following the developments closely, but won’t rush to support one side over the other without seeing the full picture.
This is a challenging case that touches on important issues of truth, transparency, and due process. I’ll be following the developments closely, but won’t endorse any particular position without seeing the full scope of the evidence.
Allegations of sexual assault should always be taken seriously, but it’s crucial that we allow due process to play out. I’ll be following this case with an open mind, hoping the truth emerges through the courts.
Fabricated sexual assault claims are deeply troubling, but so are actual incidents of abuse. I’ll withhold judgment here until the courts have fully examined the evidence and reached a conclusion.
This is certainly a complex and controversial case. I’ll wait to see how the legal process unfolds before drawing any firm conclusions. Fabricated claims of sexual assault are incredibly serious and damaging, so I hope the truth comes to light.
This is a complex and sensitive case with high stakes for all involved. I’ll avoid speculating and instead focus on letting the legal process play out objectively to determine the facts.
This is a tricky situation with a lot of he-said-she-said dynamics. I hope the legal proceedings can shed light on what really happened, without jumping to conclusions. Transparency and objectivity will be key.