Garth Brooks Defends Using Jane Roe’s Real Name, Submitting a Photo of Her to the Court as Evidence

Earlier this month, a woman known publicly as Jane Roe filed a lawsuit against Garth Brooks in California Superior Court accusing him of sexual assault and rape. Before that, Brooks filed a suit against her alleging that she was blackmailing, slandering, and defaming him. However, both suits originally used pseudonyms—John Doe and Jane Roe. Brooks later re-filed his lawsuit using Roe’s real name. As a result, her lawyers petitioned the court to sanction the country star, claiming that releasing her name put her at risk.

According to a report from InTouch, Brooks entered a photo of him and Roe as evidence along with sharing her legal name. Court documents show that Brooks only named Roe after she added his name to her lawsuit. Her legal team accused him of naming her to “retaliate, harm, and subject her to victim shaming and blaming.” They added, “This egregious conduct must not be condoned and Brooks and his counsel shall be responsible for penalties imposed by this court.”

[RELATED: Garth Brooks’ Legal Battle Heats Up As Jane Roe’s Team Moves for “Maximum Sanctions” Against the Country Star]

Garth Brooks Defends Naming Jane Roe in His Lawsuit

According to the report, Garth Brooks said Jane Roe “already agreed to use her name in litigation.” He claims that she refused to keep both of their names out of her lawsuit. She allegedly told the court she was willing to identify herself if it was necessary to prevent Brooks from proceeding under a pseudonym.

Furthermore, Brooks and his team claimed that Roe sent her lawsuit to the media and the facts within it helped internet sleuths and media insiders to easily identify her. Additionally, he stated that Roe publicly used her professional relationship with Brooks to bring her more business. He cited a magazine interview in which Roe spoke about working for him as a stylist. The interview included a photo of the two together. Brooks submitted the photo and the interview as evidence.

“No law, statute, or rule obligated Mr. Brooks to file his original complaint or his amended complaint with pseudonyms or under seal,” his legal team stated. “He initially used pseudonyms for both parties in his original complaint, and immediately moved for leave for both parties to proceed under pseudonyms, in an effort to protect both parties and their families from any harm resulting from public disclosure of [Roe’s] attempted extortion of Mr. Brooks,” they added. “[Roe] could have embraced the opportunity to remain anonymous but chose not to.”

About possible sanctions, Brooks’ lawyer said, “There is no cause to award sanctions against Mr. Brooks or his counsel. Mr. Brooks was entitled to amend his complaint.”

A judge will have the final say in the matter, but a ruling has not yet been reached.

Featured Image by Tammie Arroyo/AFF-USA/Shutterstock