Stefon Diggs Ordered to Explain To Judge How He Knows Male Sexual Assault Accuser Christopher Blake Griffith

NFL star Stefon Diggs has been ordered by a federal judge to provide more detailed answers in his ongoing legal battle with a man accusing him of sexual assault.

According to newly filed court documents, the judge ruled on several discovery disputes in the case involving Christopher Blake Griffith, who has accused Diggs of drugging and sexually assaulting him in 2023. Diggs has repeatedly denied the allegations and has filed a defamation lawsuit of his own, claiming the accusations are false and have damaged his reputation.

One of the key issues addressed by the court involved Diggs’ description of his relationship with Griffith prior to the alleged incident. When asked to explain how they knew each other, Diggs reportedly described Griffith only as an “acquaintance.”

The judge found that response insufficient and ordered Diggs to provide a more complete explanation regarding the nature of their relationship before the events at the center of the lawsuit.

In addition, the court directed Diggs to provide more detailed information about his interactions with Griffith in May 2023, as well as identify individuals who were present at his residence in Rockville, Maryland, around the time of the alleged incident.

Diggs did score a partial legal victory during the ruling. The judge determined that he does not have to answer questions regarding any alleged prior possession or distribution of controlled substances.

The case remains highly contested. Griffith continues to allege that Diggs drugged and sexually assaulted him before later orchestrating a violent attack against him. Diggs has strongly denied all allegations and maintains that Griffith fabricated the claims.

The court has ordered Diggs to provide the additional discovery responses within 14 days of the June 3 order. The judge also warned that failure to comply could result in sanctions.

As the lawsuit moves forward, both sides continue to battle over the facts surrounding the allegations, which have not been proven in court.