Smokey Robinson’s former housekeepers say they had the right to hold a press conference publicizing an explosive rape lawsuit against the Motown legend and are asking a judge to toss defamation counterclaims in the contentious legal proceedings.
A motion filed Friday (June 20) takes issue with the countersuit Robinson filed after four anonymous former housekeepers brought a $50 million civil lawsuit accusing the 85-year-old singer of a yearslong pattern of sexual assault.
Robinson and his wife, who’s also named as a defendant in the housekeepers’ case, said the rape allegations are fabricated and defamatory. While claims in legal filings are typically shielded from defamation lawsuits by the First Amendment, the Robinsons argued the accusers stepped outside these protections when they “paraded themselves in front of the media” with a press conference the day the lawsuit was filed.
The housekeepers’ lawyers disagree. In Friday’s motion to strike the counterclaims, attorneys for the accusers say their press conference was actually covered by the so-called litigation privilege and therefore cannot be the subject of defamation claims.
“The statements underlying the Robinsons’ claims, delivered by counsel for Jane Does during a press conference, concern a pending civil lawsuit involving serious allegations of sexual misconduct and are explicitly tied to that litigation,” write lawyers John Harris and Herbert Hayden. “The Robinsons’ cross-complaint is entirely without merit and appears to be a retaliatory and improper effort to chill the Jane Does’ right to speak out and to access the courts.”
Friday’s motion also criticizes the Robinsons for trying to “mislead” the court by including only partial quotations from the press conference in their countersuit, including a reference to Harris calling Robinson a “serial and sick rapist.” The housekeepers’ attorneys say Harris actually said, “We believe that Mr. Robinson is a serial and sick rapist” — an important qualifier that couches this statement as an opinion and not a fact.
The housekeepers are asking a Los Angeles judge to strike the counterclaims under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, which clears the way for quick dismissal of defamation claims that threaten free speech. Under this law, the accusers can also make the Robinsons reimburse their legal fees if they win the anti-SLAPP motion.
The Robinsons’ attorney, Christopher Frost, said in a statement to Billboard on Monday (June 23) that Friday’s motion is “all just procedural posturing.”
“While the law may allow them to make false and slanderous allegations in a complaint with impunity, it does not allow them to orchestrate a press conference to regurgitate the same lies,” said Frost.
Frost said the housekeepers’ “transparent motivation” is to use the anti-SLAPP motion as a tactic to slow down the litigation, echoing allegations in his own court filing last week that accused the women of trying to delay the discovery process.
“It is puzzling to us why they would want to do so if they really believed in their case,” added Frost.
