This case demands attention.
• And while his big-talking press conferences have captured most of the attention, what’s transpiring away from the public eye is far more important.On August 26, 2015, Jane Doe filed a civil suit against Rose and two of his closest friends, Randall Hampton and Ryan Allen.
• The motion was denied because the judge concluded there was still “a genuine dispute of material fact as to the central issue in this action: whether Plaintiff consented to sexual intercourse with Defendants in early morning of August 27, 2013.”While interest in the case has been picking up over the past few weeks, it has been largely ignored over the past year, to the point that in a memorandum filed on August 22 arguing for Jane Doe’s pseudonym to be precluded at trial, Rose’s lawyers wrote that they “do not think any media restrictions are warranted or necessary, partly because the media has to some degree lost interest in the case.”But Rose’s case demands attention.
• In the past few months, as the two sides have prepared for trial, it has become readily apparent that the case shares dangerous commonalities with other high-profile cases of sexual assault by famous athletes.By repeatedly fighting to publicly reveal Jane Doe’s name, presenting her as sexually adventurous and aggressive, and glossing over the issue of consent, Rose’s defense has focused more on smearing the victim than proving its client’s innocence.The Battle Over The ‘Jane Doe’ PseudonymRose’s attorneys want the alleged victim’s name to be a matter of public record and used freely in the upcoming trial.Currently, Doe’s attorneys are offering a compromise, saying that the alleged victim’s real name can be used in the trial, but that access to the courtroom will be limited and the media will still be required to use “Jane Doe.”Rose’s lawyers have not agreed to the compromise.
• No matter how Plaintiff chooses to depict her sexuality on social media, her allegations of rape entitle her to the protections of anonymity.Doe’s lawyers continue to argue that a pseudonym is crucial to the alleged victim’s safety.“Public disclosure of Plaintiff’s name and likeness does not serve any legitimate purpose but rather only serves Defendants’ attempts to intimidate and harass Plaintiff and to have a plausible deniability defense if third parties engage in harassment, intimidation, or worse,” they said in a memorandum filed on August 29.The Slut-Shaming DefenseIn multiple court briefings, Rose’s legal team describes Doe as “sexually adventurous,” and as the “sexual aggressor” the night in question.Of course, being sexually adventurous has no bearing on whether or not a person can be raped.
• In fact, Doe even burned her hand after she picked up rocks in the fire pit for “no rational reason.”After Groff allegedly had a fight with Allen that night, she decided to leave the party.
• Is there — within what you just reviewed in those text messages, is there anything within them that would lead you to believe that plaintif wanted to have sex with you and the other two defendants on August 26th, 2013?…Rose: No.The AftermathDoe said in her deposition that she woke up the next morning “fully dressed and wet with lubricant.” Her sheets were a mess and also filled with lubricant, and there was a used condom.“I never had my apartment that way,” she said.
