don’t we have the right to confront our accusers? As long as they aren’t released to the public the defense should have the names. While it might be really naive of me to hope this, I hope the release doesn’t change the facts of the case
The language of the release leads me to believe that Hardin is requesting that the names be released publicly, not that Buzbee is withholding the identity of the plaintiffs to Watson. Am I misreading here?
right up until the victims are doxxed and harassed by idiot Clemson and Texans fans into mysteriously recanting because their phone won't stop ringing with death threats.
Now now they've already identified themselves as being part of that whatever number that said he didn't do anything wrong in that terribly written statement his attorney released supporting his client.
yes you are all misreading the release. buzbee hasn't provided the names of the accusers to hardin. they have to answer the lawsuit in ten days and that's pretty difficult if you don't know who the plaintiff is.
that's a federal rule, not a state rule either way you have to let the defendant know who you are. that is what hardin is asking buzbee to do.
In the motion, Hardin writes that "because Plaintiff's counsel filed the actions anonymously, Mr. Watson's counsel can only speculate about Plaintiff's identity." "Mr. Watson's counsel cannot in good conscience publicly respond to the specific allegations being made because any response would be based on dangerous speculation about the identity of the accusers," Hardin said in the motion. "It is easy to imagine the harm that would be caused if Ms. Doe was mistakenly identified.
from Hardin's motion: Immediately after the filing of the lawsuit, Mr. Hardin asked Mr. Buzbee to provide him with Ms. Doe’s true identity. Mr. Buzbee refused and stated that Mr. Hardin would have to file a motion to get this information.
Ok those two guys (the ones who are LMFAO) definitely did not sing Summer Girls, Matt Gaetz's favorite song
I don’t see how it’s possible to Answer a complaint against an anonymous accuser in this situation. Hardin’s press release was really poorly drafted.
I also understand not willingly disclosing this information without a confidentiality agreement in place.
his motion wasn't. buzbee hasn't filed a reply yet but hardin's motion was VERY persuasive and i think these jane does are all going to have to put their names on the lawsuits or else they're going to get dismissed.
hardin's motion makes it seem pretty clear that texas rules make plaintiff's put their names on their lawsuits or else they're getting dismissed unless the plaintiffs are minors. i'm sure buzbee will file a reply today. i'll take a look at that too. i was pretty persuaded by hardin's motion.
While I can see a situation in which a plaintiff could fairly stay anonymous, (even as a bleeding heart feminist) I don’t see how that’s possible here. I also don’t see how these women can prove their cases staying anonymous in a jury trial.
texas law makes it pretty clear that if you want to pursue a civil suit that you have to put your name on the pleadings. sucks for these women. i'm guessing some of them will choose to nonsuit their cases instead of being identified.
agree but unless hardin is just misstating the law that's not going to happen. if i'm hardin i want the judge to rule that these women have to disclose who they are publicly
This happens in any high profile civil case. You can't just remain anonymous forever especially when the accused has to file pleadings. At a minimum he's going to be forced to provide her identity to Watson and his lawyer. Maybe there's a ruling that it may not be leaked from the judge. Guess we'll see.
There’s no legitimate reason to name the accusers publicly. I’d (publicly) fucking crucify Hardin if he took that position. Pretty easy to get in front of a press gaggle and say that you’d disclose them privately to protect these women, but opposing counsel wants it public to harass them. I’d then print out comment sections from the news articles on the two who have come out publicly.
I know there are legal standards for this stuff. It just seems really fucked up that as a victim of a sexual assault you have to expose yourself to possibly worse treatment just to be made whole (as much as possible).
That's how it would be done here or in Federal Court, so long as they proved that there was a compelling need for the cases to be under seal. I think Buzbee is trying to have his cake and eat it, too. You can't maintain anonymity of your clients and then use the media to detail the allegations.
unless hardin was completely just misstating the law i'm 90% sure these women are going to have to put their names on the pleadings. hardin has a section in the motion where he says they might not have to in federal court but lists a ton of cases from tx where pleadings were struck for not stating name of plaintiff
They're public record until they go under seal. It's pretty tough to meet the burden of proving that it should go under seal, but it can be done.
So Buzbee has agreed to give the names confidentially. Will be interesting to see what the judge says. Anybody know anything about the judge?