Lawyers for Brooks accuser file emergency motion to seal Mississippi case

JACKSON, Miss. (WLBT) – One day after Garth Brooks disclosed the name of his accuser in court documents, the woman’s attorneys are asking that the case be sealed.

Brooks and his accuser, who we identify only as Jane Roe, are involved in two lawsuits, including one in U.S. District Court in Mississippi.

The country music icon filed a lawsuit last month to stop Roe from going public with allegations that he raped and sexually assaulted her in 2019 while she worked for him as a hairstylist.

Last week, Roe filed a complaint in California state court, laying out his accusations against Brooks, and on Tuesday, Brooks filed an amended complaint revealing the name of his accuser.

On Wednesday, Roe’s lawyers filed an emergency motion to seal or redact the documents and seek sanctions against the singer for “illegal and intentional disclosure of the identity of a rape victim without her consent.”

“(Brooks) initiated this action improperly, in an attempt to thwart Ms. Roe’s efforts to assert causes of action against him in California under California’s sexual battery statute,” lawyers for Roe. “No basis exists under the Declaratory Judgment Act for Mr. Doe to assert his claims, but he filed his frivolous complaint to threaten Ms. Roe in connection with her case in California.”

Roe, who now lives in Mississippi, accuses Brooks of raping her in 2019 while the two were in Los Angeles for a Grammy Awards event. She also alleges other sexual misconduct, including groping her, sending her explicit text messages, regularly changing clothes and exposing himself in front of her, and openly talking about sexual topics around her.

Brooks claims the allegations are false and Roe is trying to shake him down for millions of dollars because he refused to offer him a salaried position with benefits.

He initially filed suit to block his efforts in Mississippi, where Roe currently lives, and used pseudonyms to protect his identity.

In his latest filing, he alleges that Roe initially agreed not to release Brooks’ name until the district court ruled. He said his decision to file suit in California before that was intended to subvert the court’s power.

Roe’s lawyers disagree and told Judge Henry Wingate in a letter that she notified Brooks to give him time to contact the court before filing his suit in California.

Unquestionably, the defendant informed the plaintiff and his lawyer of its intention to bring the action “immediately” and to file it before the end of the week, that is to say no later than October 4, 2024. response to this notice received on October 1, 2024, Plaintiff had the opportunity and time to contact this Court to seek temporary relief from the impending filing or to be heard on the matter as soon as possible, but he chose to do nothing do,” wrote attorney Jeanne Christensen.

Meanwhile, Christensen said Brooks failed to extend his client the same courtesy before filing the amended complaint.

“There is absolutely no legal justification for the plaintiff to amend his complaint in order to reveal the identity of the defendant,” she wrote. “(The) plaintiff did this solely out of malice and to retaliate, intimidate and otherwise harm Ms. Roe for daring to hold him accountable.”

Want more WLBT news in your inbox? Click here to subscribe to our newsletter.

See a spelling or grammar error in our story? Please Click here to report it and include the story title in your email.

Copyright 2024 WLBT. All rights reserved.