Attorney: Plaintiff could request Seattle Mayor Ed Murray undergo another exam
Apr 12, 2017, 6:02 AM | Updated: 9:12 am
The doctor’s exam of Seattle Mayor Ed Murray’s genitalia is certainly a bombshell in the sex-abuse allegations brought against him, according to a prominent Seattle attorney.
RELATED: Murray facing a ‘really, really tough problem’
However, Anne Bremner told KIRO Radio’s Ron and Don that a judge would not be required to dismiss this case based on the medical record alone.
“It’s up to the plaintiff’s lawyers to do what they think is appropriate,” she said.
What is more interesting, in Bremner’s opinion, is that a board certified gastroenterologist at the Polyclinic is listed on the medical record that Murray’s attorney, Bob Sulkin, provided at the news conference.
Sulkin said the description of Murray’s physical appearance is false. The examination found no mole, no bump, and no evidence of removal.
“Other things can account for things on the genitalia,” Bremner said, adding that the plaintiff, named as D.H. in the lawsuit, can request another exam.
D.H. alleges the mayor molested and raped him as a teenager in the 1980s. The Seattle Times reports two other men have also accused Murray of sexual abuse in the ’80s.
Former Attorney General Rob McKenna told KIRO Radio’s Jason Rantz that Murray doesn’t have to agree to another examination.
“This is not a criminal case,” McKenna said. “This is a civil case.”
McKenna added that Sulkin could stack testimony from Murray’s doctor up against testimony of the plaintiff’s. He said they could introduce photo evidence into the case, but that’s unlikely due to privacy issues.
“The doctor’s testimony could be challenged on the stand,” McKenna said. “Essentially, the mayor will be putting the credibility of his physician up against the plaintiff’s claims.”
Sulkin said in his Tuesday news conference that the heart of the claim is the description of the mayor’s private anatomy and dismissed the description of Murray’s former Capitol Hill apartment and old phone number as mere public record.
But Bremner said you can’t dismiss that there are two other accusers named in The Seattle Times’ story.
“They would be able to testify under some circumstances,” she said.
In Tuesday’s new conference, Sulkin reminded reporters that allegations had been made against the mayor prior to D.H.’s lawsuit — when Murray was “pushing the marriage equality act.”
“They were found to be false and not worthy of being published by The Seattle Times,” Sulkin said. “These accusers were aligned with a vehement anti-gay organization. And now, on the cusp of a mayoral election, we have allegations dating back 30 years.”
According to The Seattle Times, D.H.’s attorney, Lincoln Beauregard, “suggested the doctor’s exam could not be independently verified.”
