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

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

“Everything must now be put on hold until the court rules on the anonymity request,” U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate said during a hearing Friday. “The motion to dismiss is due one week from today. Then we go through the normal briefing schedule.”

At the heart of the matter is whether to release the identity of a woman accusing Garth Brooks of rape.

In September, Brooks filed a lawsuit 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 lawsuit filed in California in October, Brooks’ attorneys filed an amended complaint releasing her name.

An emergency motion was filed to redact the court file, but after three hours of questioning, Wingate had additional questions, mainly about whether Brooks’ counsel should be held in contempt for releasing Roe’s name.

Wingate’s decision to delay a ruling came after about three hours of questioning, with many of the judge’s questions directed at Roe’s counsel, attorney Jeanne Christensen.

Christensen argued that not redacting the case would set a “terrible precedent” by telling people with unlimited resources to game the system rather than face the consequences of their actions.

“He’s going to take this role and wave it at 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, an attorney for Brooks, said his client did not release Roe’s name until she released his identity in the California lawsuit, and that Brooks initially wanted to use pseudonyms to protect his and his accuser’s identities.

“We tried to be as non-specific as possible because we knew the complaint would be on the docket. We described the plaintiff as a Tennessee resident, celebrity and public figure. We described the defendant (as a) professional, an independent contractor who worked for our plaintiff for a number of years,” he said. “We have tried to protect their identities and their families, quite frankly, from any consequences that would arise from the complaint.”

That all changed when Roe filed the suit in California and named Brooks as a defendant.

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

“They spread it all over the country. “My phone lit up with calls about their complaint… They had actually taken the complaint, which had not been filed, and distributed it to the media as part of a scheme to smear my client’s reputation,” he continued.

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

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

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

Roe had done makeup and hairstyling for Brooks’ wife, Trisha Yearwood, since 1999, and started doing hair and makeup for Brooks in 2017.

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

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

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

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

Wingate said, “I don’t feel like sealing the slips. I have no motion to seal the exhibits. And then a hearing is held. There is no proposal to exclude the public, to try the case ‘behind closed doors’… Then we come to court, (and) Mr. Kaufman… explains his detective work that can be duplicated by almost anyone . That’s what he says. And then, based on that detective work, he presents three pieces of evidence that mention your client’s name. There is no objection. There is no objection to the argument he makes. No objection to the use of a name that he believes identifies your client… In light of all this, in light of this hearing… what do you ask?’

“In camera” refers to items recorded privately in the courtroom, without public view.

Christensen said she wanted the amended complaint and all articles submitted as evidence in the case to be sealed and that no additional documents bearing Roe’s name be filed.

“It’s very different to say, ‘I could start figuring out who she is if I really look,’ rather than standing up and telling the world who you are as a rape victim,” she said. “They undermine her ability to say why she should continue this way by doing exactly what they are doing.”

She also told the judge that many media outlets have not yet publicly released Roe’s name because she is an alleged victim of sexual assault.

“I can’t control the internet. I’m not sure what the court could do on that front. But I do know what it can do to keep them from replicating her action in California, and that’s what it’s all about,” she said. “To the extent that it can be contained, it must be contained immediately.”

Christensen is expected to file her statement Monday. Wingate has scheduled a Zoom call with attorneys on Tuesday.

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

Do you see a spelling or grammatical error in our story? Please click here to report it and include the story headline in your email.

Copyright 2024 WLBT. All rights reserved.