Lawyers for former Senate President Stan Rosenberg and his estranged husband Bryon Hefner have requested that the court publicly reveal the identity of the John Doe who accused Hefner of sexual assault.
Rosenberg’s lawyer Michael Pineault argues that there aren’t sufficient legal grounds to keep the alleged victim anonymous, and that the alleged victim "fails to advance any grounds sufficient to justify permitting him to continue to level highly public, incendiary, and destructive allegations against Mr. Rosenberg from behind ‘a cloak of anonymity,'" Pineault wrote in a filing on Tuesday.
Hefner's attorney, Tracy Miner, joined in asking the court to release the name on Thursday.
WGBH Legal Analyst Daniel Medwed says that this tactic might be an attempt to shame the alleged victim into silence.
"It does strike me as a potential intimidation tactic," Medwed said. "Victims, survivors of sexual assault historically have faced a number of barriers in coming forward, including the prospect of shame."
“I think what Rosenberg is doing, indirectly, is trying to shame by name, to try to get this person’s name out there in the public arena," Medwed continued. "I don’t see much of a practical reason for doing that besides shame, or stigmatizing that person.”
According to Medwed, lawyers and judges may not respond well to this tactic. "It could actually boomerang against Rosenberg," he said. "The fact that he’s come out publicly to suggest this, or that it’s made the news, they could view that as really improper, and they might dig in their heels even more."
Hefner is accused of sexually abusing the alleged victim, a former Beacon Hill legislative aide, twice in Rosenberg’s presence.
When the lawsuit was filed last month, Judge Debra A. Squires-Lee immediately impounded the victim's identity.
Pineault responded to a request to Rosenberg for comment, declining to comment "Beyond what we have stated in our publicly filed pleading," Pineault wrote in an email to WGBH News. "We have faith that the court will fairly adjudicate the matter after full consideration of the parties’ respective positions and the relevant legal authority."
A hearing date has been scheduled for next Wednesday to debate whether to reveal the plaintiff’s identity.
Click on the audio player above to hear the radio version of this story.
