A Nova Scotia judge turned down an application from two “prominent” Halifax businessman who wanted to remain anonymous in a possible sexual harassment lawsuit, saying that it would go against the principles of Canada’s open court process.
Justice Denise Boudreau delivered the oral decision Thursday in Nova Scotia Supreme Court, according to CBC.
The two businessmen — who have been referred to as “John Doe” and “Jim Doe” in court documents — had sought to protect their identities under pseudonyms, arguing that the threats of a civil suit alleging sexual harassment were effectively an extortion attempt by their accuser, referred to as “Jane Roe.”
“If the Respondent files an action, the allegation will immediately become public and will then cause irreparable harm to the Applicant’s business and reputation in the community,” court documents argued.
Jane Roe’s legal representatives had not contested the application for anonymity.
“The applicants should know that I have heard and fully understand their concerns,” said Justice Bourdreau in her decision, according to CBC.
“However, I do not find that these concerns trump the greater principle here that is to be protected … That is to say, the open court principle.”
READ MORE: RCMP encouraging people caught in a sextortion scam to come forward
Relationship admitted to in court documents
In court documents reviewed by Global News, both men admitted to having had past relationships with Jane Roe, described as being an employee of a company they both had business with.
The details of the sexual harassment are detailed in a heavily redacted psychological assessment filed with the court on behalf of Jane Roe.
The report was sent to both John Doe and Jim Doe, according to court documents.
The psychologist, whose name is redacted, notes in her report that the harassment from both men is said to have happened “simultaneously.”
WATCH: Prominent Leaside businessmen say they’re being targeted by extortionist
Relationship with John Doe
Jane Roe’s relationship with John Doe is said to have began as a business relationship, only to become more personal and physical once he confided to her about his marriage.
According to the report, Jane Roe “provided oral sex on one occasion but he thought it was ‘dirty.'”
The reason for the termination of their relationship is redacted.
Relationship with Jim Doe
Court documents filed on behalf of Jim Doe indicated that he was a customer of Jane Roe’s employer in the “early to late 2000s.”
“Over time, the relationship evolved to a stage where Jim Doe paid for and received sexual services from Ms. Roe,” read the documents.
“These facts are not in dispute,”
The psychologist’s report alleges that the first inappropriate behavior from Jim Doe occurred in his office. When Jane Roe got up to leave Jim Doe is alleged to have said “you’re not leaving without a kiss goodbye.”
He is then alleged to have kissed her on the lips for “for approximately five seconds.”
Approximately a month later, the relationship escalated to Jane Roe providing oral sex to Jim Doe. This is said to have occurred only after Jane Roe said no “four or five times” to requests from Jim Doe.
Jim Doe then began to provide Jane Roe with financial compensation for each incident of oral sex. The relationship only stopped after Jim Doe was no longer a client of Jane Roe’s employer.
WATCH: Online ‘sextortion’ cases prompt public warning
Request for compensation
According to court documents, Jane Roe is said to have contacted John Doe on Facebook in June 2014, several years after the relationship had ended.
“I find myself in need of contacting you regarding the fact I am requesting monetary support from you,” the message from Jane Roe reads.
“This is a one time request of $6500 which you can consider a gift to me.”
Jane Roe replied by saying that she would no longer keep the relationship secret since he told his family writing: “If you have a change of heart, let me know. It’s amazing how many people seem to want to know about us.”
“Google extortion it’s a criminal offence thx for these messages for the proof,” John Doe wrote back.
Court documents show the lawyer for Jane Roe’s contacted Jim Doe in April 2018, informing them that Jane Roe was considering a lawsuit, but that she “was prepared at this stage to address possible resolution without making this matter public.”
Ruling on privacy
According to CBC, in her oral decision Boudreau is said to have compared the situation of John Doe and Jim Doe with anyone named in a civil action or criminal prosecution.
“All defendants to a greater or lesser extent might wish to keep the allegations made against them out of the public eye. But that is not is how our system works. Our judicial system is based on the principle of openness and transparency,” she said.