‘Where is the Video?’: Court Filings Challenge Nancy Mace’s Story

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

by JENN WOOD

***

What began as a bombshell sexual-assault lawsuit — fueled by dramatic claims from South Carolina congresswoman/gubernatorial candidate Nancy Mace — has now erupted into a sprawling, deeply personal legal war involving accusations of hacking, blackmail, fabricated evidence, and political manipulation.

The case first entered the public view in May 2025, when an anonymous woman filed an expansive lawsuit in Charleston County accusing three Lowcountry businessmen — including Mace’s former fiancé, Patrick Bryant — of drugging her, sexually assaulting her, and recording the assault while she was unconscious. The complaint (.pdf) alleged third-degree criminal sexual conduct, battery, conspiracy, and the dissemination of nonconsensual images. It also claimed the men attempted to intimidate her into silence.

The woman’s filing directly echoed — and expanded upon — Mace’s now-viral “scorched earth” speech delivered in February 2025 from the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. In that address, Mace stunned Congress by announcing she had “accidentally” discovered “photos and video” of the alleged assault on Bryant’s phone. In that speech, Mace told lawmakers, “I had to tell a woman she’d been raped — she had no idea because she was incapacitated when it happened.”

Mace further alleged that John Osborne, one of Bryant’s business associates, performed sex acts on the unconscious woman while Bryant and another associate “had their phones out during the rape.”

***

According to the plaintiff, she did not learn any of this until Mace called her in April 2024. In a statement released through her attorney, the woman praised Mace’s “courage” in bringing the alleged assault to light. Mace, in turn, vowed to “stand with her, under oath, every step of the way,” and publicly attacked Bryant as “a predator hiding behind power and privilege.”

Even as Mace positioned herself as an advocate, though, the underlying allegations were already contested. Bryant denied wrongdoing, accused Mace of “weaponizing her office,” and pointed to statements from former Mace strategist Wesley Donehue, who said in a leaked deposition that while the congresswoman had shown him some images, “there was no proof of some of the things she was alleging.”

The S.C. State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) confirmed a criminal inquiry had been opened related to allegations made in Mace’s speech, but declined to elaborate – saying the investigation was still “active and ongoing.”

This precarious foundation exploded into a far more complex — and adversarial — conflict this fall.

In newly filed counterclaims and third-party actions, Bryant accused Mace of fabricating elements of the assault narrative, illegally accessing his phone, deleting and extracting its data, and manipulating the plaintiff’s story for personal and political purposes. According to Bryant’s filing, Mace “stole” his phone, used recovery software to retrieve its contents, threatened him with the material, and repeatedly accused him online of being a “rapist” and “criminal” despite never producing the alleged video at the center of her claims.

Those court documents transformed the case. What began as a high-profile assault lawsuit — one already mired in political fallout — has now become a battle over credibility, hacked data, the alleged existence of a rape video no one has ever seen, and whether a sitting member of Congress fabricated evidence that formed the basis of her own viral advocacy.

This week, the conflict escalated yet again…

***

BRYANT MOVES TO RESTRAIN MACE

Among the latest filings was a motion (.pdf) for a temporary restraining order (TRO) seeking to bar Mace from releasing what Bryant’s attorneys have described as “salacious private and personal” images and videos allegedly taken from his phone. The same filing also renewed Bryant’s earlier request for an in-camera review of the purported video of the alleged 2018 assault — a video the plaintiff has admitted she has never seen and does not possess.

After the motion was submitted, Bryant released a public statement explaining why he instructed his attorneys to seek court intervention, saying he authorized the TRO “in hopes of stopping her lies, which I know the whole world appreciates.”

***

***

According to Bryant, he sought the order because Mace continues to broadcast accusations without evidence, calling the TRO an effort “to prevent (Mace) from continuing to publish baseless claims about me on social media without offering a single piece of actual evidence.”

Bryant added the request was intended to stop what he described as harassment targeting his legal team, noting “she has been doing [this] through profanity filled threats and public smears.”

“None of that should be tolerated from a sitting Congresswoman who has to lead by example,” Bryant said.

In the motion itself, Bryant alleged Mace threatened to release sexually explicit photos and videos she “unlawfully obtained by surreptitiously hacking into his phone,” arguing such public disclosure would cause “irreparable and permanent harm.” The filing asserted Mace has possessed his data for more than two years and has “threatened” to make the material public, even though no charges have resulted from anything she claims to have found.

***

JUDGE STRIPS ANONYMOUS PROTECTIONS

On the same day the TRO was filed, S.C. circuit court judge Donald Hocker issued a sweeping order (.pdf) ending the use of pseudonyms in the civil case – ruling the plaintiff and key witness must be identified moving forward. Bryant highlighted the significance of the decision in his public statement, noting his accuser, Alexis ‘Ali’ Berg, can no longer remain anonymous. The same applied to Melissa Britton, the witness.

In his written order, Judge Hocker determined both identities were already known to the parties and the public, and concluded neither woman had a remaining privacy interest justifying continued anonymity under South Carolina law. He directed all future filings to use full legal names — a notable shift in a case involving sexual-assault allegations and one that dramatically alters its public posture.

***

RELATED | NANCY MACE ACCUSED OF FABRICATING SEXUAL ASSAULT CLAIMS

***

EVIDENCE DISPUTES, ESCALATING PUBLIC CONFRONTATION

A central tension in the case continues to be the existence — and non-production — of the alleged video of the plaintiff’s 2018 sexual assault. During a prior hearing, the plaintiff’s attorney acknowledged to the court, “no, your honor – I don’t have the video.”

“That’s not in my custody and control,” she added, noting that “while (Berg) has not seen the video she has seen still shots of the video.”

Those statements have fueled Bryant’s repeated push for an in-camera review of any relevant materials, and form the basis of his argument that Mace’s narrative hinges on evidence no one in the civil litigation — not the court, not the attorneys, not even the plaintiff — has actually seen.

According to the new filings, once Bryant sought production of the alleged video, Mace shifted her public focus to unrelated women and began amplifying other intimate material she claims to possess. The filings included a series of profanity-laced emails sent by Mace to Bryant’s attorneys, in which she wrote, “you opened this pandora’s box and you can deal with the consequences.”

“Wait until you hear about the possible CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE MATERIAL on your client’s phone (allegedly),” she wrote.

In another message, she told Bryant’s counsel, “FUCK YOU AND EVERY PEDOPHILE AND RAPIST YOU’VE EVER REPRESENTED,” followed by the threat, “You poked the wrong bear. And you will pay dearly.”

***

***

Mace continued to escalate in subsequent emails.

“What’s most fucked up about this is you have a rapist, suing rape victims,” she wrote. “Sick. Disgusting. Gross.”

She also made it abundantly clear she had no intention of complying with any cease-and-desist directive, stating, “I will continue exercising my First Amendment rights on my social media platforms and elsewhere.” In another message, she added, “If you’d like to see what I really think of alleged rapist Bryant – please continue to follow me on all of my social media accounts.”

These communications — sent to multiple attorneys and staff members — are now part of the evidentiary record supporting Bryant’s request to restrict Mace’s public commentary. And after Bryant announced the TRO filing on Facebook, Mace doubled down publicly, posting on X: “I don’t know who needs to hear this but you can’t get a restraining order on the First Amendment or the truth. HOLD THE LINE.”

***

I don’t know who needs to hear this but you can’t get a restraining order on the First Amendment or the truth.

HOLD THE LINE pic.twitter.com/FjHX2u3kDq

— Nancy Mace (@NancyMace) November 18, 2025

***

NATIONAL MEDIA ZEROES IN ON MACE’S BEHAVIOR

Mace’s behavior — both in this case and in a series of recent public incidents — has begun to attract national coverage. In a recent op-ed, columnist Kathleen Parker of The Washington Post described Mace as someone who “can’t seem to stop immersing herself in embarrassing confrontations and highlighting them against her best interest.”

Parker recounted Mace’s highly publicized confrontation at Charleston International Airport last month, where officers described her behavior as “inappropriate and profane,” and noted reports that Mace called them “f—ing incompetent.” Parker dismissed Mace’s suggestion that airport security was part of a conspiracy to derail her gubernatorial run, calling it “pure paranoia.”

Parker also wrote that Mace has “acted out too many times to be seriously considered for governor,” and concluded she “desperately needs a break from the pressures of public office.”

The combination of those national storylines with the new Charleston filings has pushed Mace’s legal and political position into the national spotlight.

***

RELATED | LEGAL WIN FOR NANCY MACE

***

WHAT COMES NEXT

The court will now determine whether it will restrain a sitting congresswoman from speaking publicly about an ongoing civil case — including statements about Bryant, his attorneys, or the women Mace has referenced on social media.

Bryant maintains that he has allowed the legal system to operate while Mace has continued to escalate online.

“For two years she has used her platforms to defame me while producing nothing to support her allegations,” he said.

Mace, meanwhile, insists she will not be silenced, saying “I will fight like hell to protect women and girls with every fiber of my being.”

With the anonymity order now in effect and the restraining-order motion pending, the case is approaching a pivotal moment—one that will shape not only the litigation but also the political future of one of South Carolina’s most polarizing figures.

***

ABOUT THE AUTHOR …

As a private investigator turned journalist, Jenn Wood brings a unique skill set to FITSNews as its research director. Known for her meticulous sourcing and victim-centered approach, she helps shape the newsroom’s most complex investigative stories while producing the FITSFiles and Cheer Incorporated podcasts. Jenn lives in South Carolina with her family, where her work continues to spotlight truth, accountability, and justice.

***

WANNA SOUND OFF?

Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.