Who is 'Jane'? Witness faces battle for anonymity in Sean 'Diddy' Combs trial
As Sean "Diddy" Combs' sex-crimes trial stretches on in New York, another woman is taking the stand to testify to abuse and coercion at the hands of the music mogul.
The witness, who is going simply by "Jane," will remain anonymous – a request granted by the judge, who has explicitly warned jurors and court attendees against sharing information that could reveal her identity.
Jane is following in the footsteps of "Mia," a former employee of Combs, who has accused the rapper of assault and also testified under a pseudonym. Jane, a single mother who prosecutors claim was roped into Combs' empire of sex parties and abuse, faces an uphill battle, though, in keeping her true identity hidden.
After her testimony wrapped up this week, several outlets published Mia's real name online, a practice generally avoided by newspapers and magazines at the urging of the courts.
Prosecutors also alerted the judge that an individual inside the courtroom this week had broadcast the proceedings into his phone, using Mia's name and later outing her again on his YouTube channel. The person was banned from the courtroom.
A witness' identity can be kept private for a host of reasons but, in the case of both Mia and Jane, it is likely being done to prevent online harassment by legions of Combs' loyal fans and to avoid the shame that can sometimes accompany admitting one has been sexually assaulted.
Especially in a high-profile case like that of Combs, who is charged with sex trafficking, racketeering and transportation to engage in prostitution, a victim may choose to remain anonymous to protect themselves from retaliation or harassment.
Anonymity has emerged as a hot-button issue in recent years, particularly in the wake of the #MeToo movement, as one side argues that if a celebrity faces public allegations of assault, the accuser should be forced to come forward, too.
On the other side, advocates argue that, given the public shame that can come from revealing one has been assaulted, anonymity provides a necessary sense of security, so victims choose to come forward.
"The reason the defense wants the victims to be identified is they think, and rightfully so, that that will discourage victims from coming forward," former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani previously told Paste BN.
"They've been victimized, (and) now they have to relive this trauma in a very public way," says Rahmani, president of personal injury law firm West Coast Trial Lawyers. "These cases draw a lot of attention. People on social media will call them liars. They'll say that this is just a money grab, that they're just seeking fame."