Attorneys for a former student at Germantown Academy who alleges pervasive same-sex abuse at the school say his privacy rights outweigh the public’s right to know his identity.
In a recent court filing, attorneys for “John Doe” refute the school’s position that Doe must use his real name in court papers.
Doe claims that other male students at the school subjected him to degrading abuse, including pulling out his chest hair, kneeing him in the groin, urinating upon him and threatening to rape him.
Doe says he sought psychotherapy and began taking several anti-depressants in order to function, due to the alleged abuse. He’s seeking more than $50,000 in damages, according to a lawsuit pending in Montgomery County Common Pleas Court.
School officials want Doe’s case dismissed, partly because Doe refuses to use his real name in court papers. They insist that Doe is no different than other adult litigants who must identify themselves.
In a filing last month, attorneys for Doe called the school’s position “outrageous,” and said victims of “sexual exploitation” such as Doe have important privacy rights.
School officials allegedly want to “further harass and cause problems in [Doe’s] life” by trying to publicly identify him, according to the filing.
Doe’s attorneys emphasize that Doe and his family have suffered enough and “shouldn’t be subjected to more public shame and embarrassment,” according to the filing.
Requiring Doe to divulge his true identity would have a chilling effect on other sexual-exploitation victims who seek justice in the judicial system, the filing adds.
“The public has an interest in protecting the identities of sexual-assault victims so that other victims will feel more comfortable suing to vindicate their rights,” Doe’s attorneys wrote.
They also point out that school officials already know Doe’s real name.
“His anonymity affords [school officials] no inconvenience or prejudice whatsoever as [they] know his identity and will not be prevented from conducting discovery,” the attorneys stated.
But school officials claim that Doe has an unfair advantage because he can publicly name and criticize them, thus applying pressure to get a favorable cash settlement. They also claim that Doe isn’t concerned about “public stigma” because his attorneys have widely publicized his lawsuit.
School officials also point out that Doe never requested permission from the court to use a pseudonym, and that no state law allows Doe to litigate anonymously merely to avoid embarrassment.
A judicial ruling on whether Doe may litigate anonymously hadn’t been rendered as of presstime. Neither side had a comment for this report.