Judge wants more information before ruling on motion to seal Garth Brooks case

JACKSON, Miss. (WLBT) – It could be next week that a federal judge decides whether to redact names in a case between a country music superstar and the hairstylist accusing him of sexual assault.

“Everything must remain in abeyance at this time, until the court rules on the request for anonymity,” U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate said during a hearing Friday. “The motion to dismiss is due one week from today. Then we will move on to the normal briefing program.

At the heart of the issue is whether the identity of a woman accusing Garth Brooks of rape should be revealed.

In September, Brooks filed suit in U.S. District Court in Jackson to prevent the woman, initially identified only as Jane Roe, from going public.

After Roe named him in a complaint filed in California in October, Brooks’ lawyers filed an amended complaint revealing his name.

An emergency motion to redact the court record was filed, but after three hours of questioning, Wingate had additional questions, including whether Brooks’ attorney should be held in contempt of court for disclosed Roe’s name.

Wingate’s decision not to issue his ruling came after about three hours of questioning, with most of the judge’s questions directed at Roe’s attorney, attorney Jeanne Christensen.

Christensen argued that not expunging the case would set a “horrible precedent” that people with unlimited resources could cheat the system rather than face consequences for their actions.

“He’s going to take this case and wave it in front of a California judge and say, ‘Look what happened in Mississippi, your honor,'” she said. “I still think this court has the discretion to allow that to happen.”

David Kaufman, Brooks’ attorney, says his client did not disclose Roe’s name until she revealed her identity in the California lawsuit.

He pointed out that Roe’s lawyers filed that complaint before Wingate had a chance to rule on the original case.

“They said in one of their closing arguments that they wanted a level playing field. They have one now, but they don’t like it,” he said.

Kaufman used Roe’s name several times during the proceedings. Christensen rejected the use of Roe’s name and said she would file a motion to have it removed from the court transcripts.

He went on to say that anyone reading the California lawsuit could figure out Roe’s identity based on how her lawyers described her.

Roe has been doing makeup and hair for Brooks’ wife, Trisha Yearwood, since 1999, and began doing Brooks’ hair and makeup in 2017.

He said an Internet search revealed an article in Billboard Magazine identifying Roe as Brooks’ hairstylist. He said articles in publications did the same thing, including one published several years after she said Brooks allegedly raped her.

“In the industry, especially in the music and entertainment industry, celebrities know who various celebrities’ hair and makeup artists are,” Kaufman said. “When their photos are published, the publications identify who did the artists’ hair and makeup.”

“When they identified her as a longtime makeup artist for Trisha Yearwood and Garth Brooks, the cat was out of the bag.”

Wingate asked Christensen what recourse she was seeking from the court and whether, as Kaufman said, the cat was out of the bag.

Wingate said, “I have no motion to seal the records. I don’t have a motion to seal the exhibits. And then, a hearing is set. There is no motion to exclude the hearing, to take the matter ‘in camera’…Then we get to court, (and) Mr. Kaufman…explains his detective work which could be reproduced by virtually anyone. That’s what he says. And then, based on that detective work, he comes up with three pieces of evidence, which purport to name your client. There is no objection. There is no objection to the argument he makes. No objection to the use of a name that he considers to identify your client… Given all of this, given this audience… what are you asking?

She said she wants the amended complaint and all items submitted as evidence in the case sealed. Christensen also told the judge that many media outlets have yet to publicize Roe’s name because she is an alleged victim of sexual assault.

“I can’t contain the Internet. I’m not sure what the court might do on this front. But I know what she can do to not allow them to successfully usurp her California stock, and that’s what it’s about,” she said. “To the extent that it can be contained, it must be contained immediately. »

Christensen said she would file the affidavit by Monday and Wingate said he would set up a Zoom call with attorneys on Tuesday.

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.