Judge wants more info before deciding on motion to seal Garth Brooks case

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

“Everything is to be held in stasis right now, until the court rules on the motion for anonymity,” U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate said at a hearing Friday. “The motion to dismiss is due a week from today. Then we’ll go through the normal schedule of briefing.”

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

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

After Roe did name him in a suit filed in California in October, attorneys for Brooks filed an amended complaint releasing her name.

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

Wingate’s decision to hold off on a ruling came after about three hours of questioning, with much of the judge’s questions directed to Roe’s counsel, attorney Jeanne Christensen.

Christensen argued that failing to redact the case would set a “horrible precedent” telling people with unlimited resources could game the system rather than face consequences for their actions.

“He’s going to take this docket 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 this discretion from allowing that to happen.”

David Kaufman, an attorney for Brooks, says his client didn’t release Roe’s name until she released his identity in the California suit, and that initially, Brooks 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 resident in Tennessee who was a 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 tried to protect their identities and their families, frankly, from the repercussions that would [come] from the complaint.”

That all changed when Roe filed the suit in California naming Brooks as the defendant.

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

“They spread it all over the country. My phone [was] lighting up with calls about their filing... They had actually taken the complaint, which had not been filed, and circulated it to the media as part of a plan to smear my client’s reputation,” he continued.

“They said in one of their pleadings they wanted an even playing field. They’ve got one now, but they don’t like it.”

Kaufman used Roe’s name multiple times in the proceedings. Christensen rejected Roe’s name being used 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 suit could figure out Roe’s identity based on how her attorneys described her.

Roe had done make-up and hair styling for Brooks’ wife, Trisha Yearwood, since 1999, and began doing hair and make-up for Brooks in 2017.

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

“In the industry, particularly in the music and entertainment industry, the celebrities know who the hair stylists and make-up artists are for various celebrities,” Kaufman said. “When their photos are put in publications, the publications identify who did the hair and make-up for the artists.”

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

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

Said Wingate, “I have no motion to seal the briefs. I have no motion to seal the exhibits. And then, a hearing is set. There’s no motion to exclude the audience, to take the matter up ‘in camera’... Then, we come to court, [and] Mr. Kaufman... explains his detective work that could be duplicated by virtually anybody. That’s what he says. And then, based on that detective work, he offers three exhibits, which purport to name your client. There’s no objection. There’s no objection to the argument he makes. No objection to utilizing a name he considers identifies your client... In view of all this, in view of this hearing... what are you requesting?”

“In-camera” refers to items that are taken up in the courtroom in private, without being in view of the public.

Christensen said she wanted the amended complaint as well as any articles submitted as evidence in the case to be sealed and that no additional documents with Roe’s name are submitted.

“It’s very different to say, ‘I could go find out who she is if I’m really looking,’ rather than standing up and telling the world who you are as a rape victim,” she said. “They are undermining her ability to say why she should proceed this way by doing exactly what they’re doing.”

She also told the judge that many media outlets have yet to release Roe’s name publicly because she is an alleged sexual assault victim.

“I can’t contain the internet. I’m not sure what the court could do on that front. But I do know what it can do to not allow them to succeed in usurping her California action, which is what this is all about,” she said. “To the extent it can be contained, it needs to be contained immediately.”

Christensen is expected to file her affidavit by Monday. Wingate has slated 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 headline of the story in your email.