Extract:
Celebrity legal proceedings may sometimes seem lopsided − with a well-known, A-lister on one end and a lesser-recognized name on the other.
Sometimes, the other side has no name at all. Opting instead for the common pseudonyms Jane or John Doe, anonymous accusers can further intensify that dynamic and are at the center of some of the largest legal stories of the past year. Unnamed plaintiffs have come forward to accuse several stars including Sean “Diddy” Combs, Garth Brooks, Jay-Z and Diplo of sexual abuse and harassment.
Entrenched in these cases is a sinister narrative about the alleged misuse of power to propagate sexual violence. But on the sidelines, a notable legal debate is unfurling about anonymity − both its virtues and its dangers.
In the shadow of the #MeToo movement, while many have become more sensitive in dealing with matters of sexual violence, the leeway around an alleged victim’s identity only stretches so far in court.
Defense attorneys often argue anonymous accusations leave room for extortion, while the plaintiff side traditionally asserts that using a pseudonym protects victims from potential harassment, especially in the digital age. Experts say it’s complicated.
(…)
Ann Olivarius, a plaintiff’s lawyer, says traditionally defendants know their accuser’s identity but it is not made public.
The most recent case against Combs, a lawsuit filed Jan. 7, features another anonymous accuser: a woman who claims the rapper assaulted her in 2000 at age 16.
The accuser’s lawyer, Michael Rubin, wrote in his own filing, “(Doe) has expressed her desire to keep her identity concealed from the public to protect her privacy and to insulate her from social stigmatization.” He affirmed, however, that Jane Doe’s identity would be confidentially disclosed to Combs and other defendants.
