Alleged Victim Sues Judge Over Ban on "Rape" Word

A federal judge in Nebraska has given a hostile reception to an alleged sexual assault victim who sued a state judge for barring her from using the word “rape” in the trial of the suspect.

“There is something profoundly disturbing about the notion that a federal judge has the power to tell a state judge how to do his job, particularly when that state judge is presumably trying to do nothing more than protect the rights of a citizen who may have been wrongly accused of rape,” U.S. District Judge Richard G. Kopf said in ordering the plaintiff to explain why her suit should not be dismissed as filed for an improper purpose.

He also suggested the suit was "insufferably arrogant" and “all too typical of the thinking of those who view the federal courthouse as the proper forum for the advancement of their particular brand of gender politics.”

Tory Bowen's declaratory relief action is the latest twist in a longrunning battle of words with Lancaster County District Judge Jeffre Cheuvront, who is presiding over the case of the man who allegedly raped her in October 2004. Prosecutors say she was too intoxicated to consent to having sex with Pamir Safi.

Cheuvront issued a pretrial order in January 2006 barring Bowen and all other witnesses from using certain words and phrases including “rape,” “victim,” “assailant,” and “sexual assault kit.”

If Bowen violates the order, Cheuvront has threatened to jail her for contempt of court. So with a third trial in the case pending after two mistrials, she took the unusual step of suing the judge in federal court.

“The actions of Judge Cheuvront have caused and threaten to continue to cause the Plaintiff to suffer injuries that chill her ability to exercise constitutionally protected activity,” the complaint, filed Sept. 4, says.

While judicial officers are immune from claims for damages, some courts have found they can be sued for declaratory relief under Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act. Bowen alleges violations of her rights of freedom of speech, assembly and due process.

Kopf indicated some sympathy for her predicament. “[T]here is also something profoundly disturbing about a judge telling a citizen that she cannot say she was raped when testifying as a victim in a criminal case, particularly when the victim is presumably trying to do nothing more than describe what happened to her,” he said in his order to show cause issued last week.

“This brings to mind the blue burkas of a distant place,” Kopf added, citing a book about living in Afghanistan under fundamentalist Islam.

But he went on to express “serious reservations about whether this action was commenced for the improper purpose of forcing Judge Cheuvront to recuse himself from presiding over the state criminal matter or for the improper purpose of generating pretrial publicity about the plaintiff and the criminal case. Still further, I seriously doubt whether the plaintiff’s suit has any legal basis whatsoever.”

Kopf gave Bowen until Sept. 18 to respond to his order. He also said Cheuvront does not have to answer the complaint “until I am satisfied that progression of this case is appropriate.”

By Matthew Heller
9/16/07