Wants a change of venue.
Garth Brooks is just at the beginning of the legal saga surrounding sexual assault allegations made by his former hairdresser and makeup artist.
The complaint was filed anonymously last month in a California state court. The woman, who identifies herself only as Jane Roe, alleges that the country music superstar raped and sexually assaulted her on multiple occasions, including once while the two were in Los Angeles for a performance. She also claims that Garth expressed his interest in having a threesome with the woman and his wife, Trisha Yearwood.
Garth has yet to respond to the lawsuit, but as it turns out he actually filed a lawsuit of his own back in September. In that complaint, filed anonymously in federal court in Mississippi, Garth asked a judge to prevent the woman from filing her lawsuit and naming him publicly. But when that didn’t happen and the woman named him in her lawsuit in California, Garth amended his complaint in Mississippi to publicly identify his accuser, setting off a nasty legal fight over whether the country singer should be sanctioned or whether he has a right to reveal the woman’s name.
That case has since been sealed (though her name is now public anyway – can’t really put that genie back in the bottle) as the two sides argue over whether the woman should be allowed to proceed under a pseudonym and whether Garth should be sanctioned for revealing her name.
But in the meantime, he’s also dealing with the case in California – and asking to have it moved to a different court.
Last week, Garth filed a notice of removal to federal court, which would move the case from the state court in Los Angeles to California federal court.
Obviously there are advantages to having a case in federal court, including tighter deadlines and a quicker trial. Garth previously mentioned that he expected the case to take two years, and moving it to federal court can keep it on that timeline and prevent it from dragging out for who knows how long.
It will also allow Garth to potentially have a jury pool that extends from outside the city of Los Angeles should the case go to trial, potentially finding him more sympathetic jurors than those in LA who would (theoretically) be more inclined to support a female victim against a massive celebrity.
Under federal law, a case can be removed to federal court when the parties have “diversity of citizenship” – a legal term that basically means they live in different states. In this case, the plaintiff is from Mississippi and the defendant, Garth, lives in Tennessee.
The country superstar has maintained that he’s done nothing wrong, releasing a statement in the wake of the lawsuit claiming that he’s being extorted because he stopped paying her:
“For the last two months, I have been hassled to no end with threats, lies, and tragic tales of what my future would be if I did not write a check for many millions of dollars. It has been like having a loaded gun waved in my face.
Hush money, no matter how much or how little, is still hush money. In my mind, that means I am admitting to behavior I am incapable of – ugly acts no human should ever do to another.
We filed suit against this person nearly a month ago to speak out against extortion and defamation of character. We filed it anonymously for the sake of families on both sides.
I want to play music tonight. I want to continue our good deeds going forward. It breaks my heart these wonderful things are in question now. I trust the system, I do not fear the truth, and I am not the man they have painted me to be.”
Obviously this is just another step in what’s going to be a long, drawn out case. But it sounds like Garth is prepared to defend himself no matter what it takes.
