Attorneys for Plaintiff JANE DOE, a pseudonym UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Transcription

1 Case :-cv-00-mwf-jc Document - Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 0 Brandon J. Anand (SBN ) Anand Law, PC Wilshire Boulevard, Suite Los Angeles, California 00 T: -- F: -- Waukeen Q. McCoy, Esq. (SBN ) McCoy Law Firm, PC Montgomery Street, Suite 00 San Francisco, California T: --0 F: -- Attorneys for Plaintiff JANE DOE, a pseudonym UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION JANE DOE (A Pseudonym); vs. Plaintiff, DERRICK ROSE, an Individual; RANDALL HAMPTON, an Individual; RYAN ALLEN, an Individual; and DOES -0, inclusive; Defendants. Case No.: CV -0-MWF(JCx) Complaint Filed: August, 0 PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF RULING ON DEFENDANT ROSE S MOTION TO PRECLUDE USE OF PSEUDONYM AT TRIAL Judge: Hon. Michael W. Fitzgerald Plaintiff's Motion For Reconsideration Of Ruling On Defendant Rose s Motion To Preclude Use Of Pseudonym At Trial Case No. CV -0-MWF(JCx)

2 Case :-cv-00-mwf-jc Document - Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 0 I. INTRODUCTION On September 0, 0, the Court granted Defendant Rose s Motion to Preclude Plaintiff Doe from using a pseudonym at trial. Since this ruling, new and additional facts have come to light which necessitate that she be allowed to proceed under a pseudonym. Mainly, the criminal investigation against Defendants Rose, Hampton and Allen has progressed and Plaintiff is entitled to proceed under a pseudonym in the ongoing criminal investigation and pending prosecution. (See Anand Declaration, Exhibit A, which contains a true and correct copy of a Badge Note from Detective Nadine Hernandez regarding the pending criminal investigation). Of course, the protections afforded by the Criminal Court will be meaningless if Plaintiff s name is released by this Court. In addition to the ongoing criminal matter, posts which directed threats of serious harm against the Plaintiff have increased exponentially since immediately after the Court s September 0, 0 ruling. (See Anand Declaration, ). The above circumstances place Plaintiff at risk of serious bodily injury or even death in the event her real name is revealed. As a result, it is respectfully requested that the Court reverse its previous ruling and allow Plaintiff to proceed under a pseudonym at trial. This request for reconsideration is being sought on an ex parte basis due to the fact that this matter is set to proceed to trial on October th. II. ARGUMENT A. The Court s Own Rules Allow It to Reconsider its Decision and to Reverse it Pursuant to this Court s local rules, a ruling may be reconsidered when new material facts emerge. Local Rule -(b). Here, facts have emerged regarding a pending criminal investigation and likely criminal prosecution. Counsel for Plaintiff has been informed by Los Angeles Police Department Detective Nadine Hernandez that her investigation of Defendants will be Case No. CV -0-MWF(JCx) Preclude Use of Pseudonym at Trial

3 Case :-cv-00-mwf-jc Document - Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 0 presented to the Los Angeles District Attorney. Based upon Detective Hernandez s extensive training and experience, she opines that, keeping a victim anonymous is an invaluable aid to investigators as well as great comfort to victims of crimes of such a sensitive nature. (See Anand Declaration, Exhibit A, which contains a true and correct copy of a Badge Note from Detective Nadine Hernandez regarding the pending criminal investigation). Releasing Plaintiff s true name in this action will disrupt, and likely prevent any chance of a successful criminal prosecution. Preclude Use of Pseudonym at Trial The State now has an interest in protecting the Plaintiff and keeping her anonymous from the public spotlight. At the time of the hearing on Defendant Rose s Motion to Preclude the use of pseudonym at trial, the letter from the LAPD was not available to Plaintiff. The newly-obtained confirmation of an ongoing criminal investigation, and the need for anonymity in that proceeding, allows the Court to change its ruling. The People v. Bryant case aptly demonstrated that it is necessary to allow a plaintiff to proceed under a pseudonym when bringing sexual assault claims against a high-profile athlete. (People v. Bryant, P.d, (Colo. 00)). The result of the victim s name being released in the Bryant case was severe bullying and [m]ore ominously, there were hundreds of threats against the accuser s life, several of which led to arrests [and imprisonment] In effect, her life was ruined over the course of the proceedings [emphasis added]. The situation was so severe that the FBI became involved. (Id.). Risk of harm to the Plaintiff is further supported by the recent Internet posts (See Anand Declaration, Exhibit B). Misinformed fans of Defendant Derrick Rose are aggressively attacking Plaintiff. If the pseudonym is lifted, a certain segment of fans will undoubtedly attack Plaintiff personally. In fact, despite the Hadad, Richard I. People v. Bryant and the Rape Shield Law in High-Profile Cases, COLUM., J.L. & SOC. PROBS., 00. Case No. CV -0-MWF(JCx)

4 Case :-cv-00-mwf-jc Document - Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 0 Court allowing Plaintiff to proceed under a pseudonym up to this juncture, somehow Plaintiff s name has been used in attacks already. Based upon the emergence of the above facts, it is respectfully requested that this Court reconsider its decision and allow Plaintiff to proceed anonymously throughout this case. B. Applicable Law Necessitates that Plaintiff be Allowed to Proceed Under a Pseudonym California Penal Code Section. states: (a) Except as provided in Chapter 0 (commencing with Section 0) of Part of Title, or for cases in which the alleged victim of a sex offense, as specified in subdivision (e) of Section, has not elected to exercise his or her right pursuant to Section of the Government Code, the court, at the request of the alleged victim, may order the identity of the alleged victim in all records and during all proceedings to be either Jane Doe or John Doe, if the court finds that such an order is reasonably necessary to protect the privacy of the person and will not unduly prejudice the prosecution or the defense. (b) If the court orders the alleged victim to be identified as Jane Doe or John Doe pursuant to subdivision (a) and if there is a jury trial, the court shall instruct the jury, at the beginning and at the end of the trial, that the alleged victim is being so identified only for the purpose of protecting his or her privacy pursuant to this section. In order promote the State s interest in pursuing criminal charges, the above authority should be applied in this case. If Plaintiff s privacy is not protected, she is at risk of serious physical harm and possibly even death. Allowing her to proceed as Jane Doe will not prejudice the defense if an adequate explanation is provided to the jury and, in any event, the severity of potential harm and the Preclude Use of Pseudonym at Trial Case No. CV -0-MWF(JCx)

5 Case :-cv-00-mwf-jc Document - Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: 0 0 State s interest in pursuing criminal charges tip the balance in favor of maintaining anonymity. C. Due to the Fact That This Matter is Set to Be Tried on October th The Request for Reconsideration Must be Heard on an Ex Parte Basis Trial in this matter is set to commence on October, 0. As a result, any request for relief cannot be pursued through regular notice. Therefore, Plaintiff s only choice is to request that the Court reconsider its ruling on an ex parte basis. Detective Hernandez has indicated that she is willing to testify in this Court. Plaintiff requests that, if this Court is not willing to grant the requested relief on an ex parte basis, that the Court allow an in camera evidentiary hearing and allow Detective Hernandez to testify. (See Anand Declaration, ). Pursuant to Local Rule -, the justification for seeking this relief on an ex parte basis is supported by the arguments contained in this application and in the supporting declaration of Brandon J. Anand. Counsel for all other parties have been notified of Plaintiff s intention to seek ex parte relief and given an opportunity to meet and confer. (See Anand Declaration, ). III. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, and the attached declarations of Detective Nadine Hernandez and Brandon J. Anand, it is respectfully requested that this Court reconsider its ruling of September 0, 0 and allow Plaintiff to proceed under a pseudonym throughout this matter. Dated: September, 0 ANAND LAW, PC By: /s/ BRANDON J ANAND Attorneys for Plaintiff JANE DOE Preclude Use of Pseudonym at Trial Case No. CV -0-MWF(JCx)