Sexual assault victim accused of violating court order

Jane Doe spoke only with Team 10

SAN DIEGO - The city of San Diego is making a federal case out of a Team 10 investigation, as the City Attorney's Office alleges a sexual assault victim violated a protective order by talking with Team 10.

City lawyers also allege the protective order was violated when the victim and her lawyers gave Team 10 surveillance video taken by a private investigator hired by the city to follow the woman.

The surveillance video shows the victim, known only as Jane Doe, conducting routine business throughout 23 days. Doe is one of 13 women who were sexually assaulted by now convicted San Diego police officer Anthony Arevalos. She filed a civil suit against the city and is the only victim who has not settled with the city.

"It became very important to me to try and keep my identity safe so people wouldn't try and destroy my life or destroy my career, or follow me around, which has now happened," Doe told Team 10 in her only media interview.

During Arevalos' criminal trial, in which Doe served as a chief witness, and the ongoing civil case, the courts have ordered her identity protected.

Doe and her lawyers provided Team 10 the surveillance video before giving it to any other media.

"You got this from her lawyers?" City Attorney Jan Goldsmith asked when Team 10 interviewed him. "That is not only unethical, that's brazen. That's wrong."

Doe's legal team obtained the surveillance through the discovery process of the lawsuit.

Goldsmith said surveillance in a civil case is routine and he responded strongly to the fact that Team 10 had a copy of the video.

"They're not supposed to give it to you," he said.

Doe's lawyers have responded to Goldsmith in a strongly worded letter.

"Your email and phone call … containing threats that Jane Doe violated a court protective order, are further evidence of the city's on-going attempts to simultaneously hide the truth from the public and bully Jane Doe into abandoning her requests for an independent monitor of the San Diego Police Department," the letter said.

Doe and her lawyers also allege Goldsmith went too far in answering Team 10 questions about the surveillance and court-ordered settlement discussions between the parties.

"Mr. Goldsmith has not only misrepresented what went on during those court-held conferences, but he has also violated the court's rules with respect to the confidentiality of communications made therein," Doe's lawyers wrote in the letter.

"The discussion is about money," Goldsmith previously told Team 10. "They want to get rich off the case."

The city attorney's office issued the following statement to Team 10 responding to this story:

"We are not about to get into nasty letter writing campaign with Los Angeles lawyer Browne Greene. This case is set for trial in about 90 days and we are happy to let the jury decide how much to award to his client. Apparently, Mr. Greene thinks he can get more money by bashing the City in the media everyday for the next 90 days."

Print this article Back to Top

Comments