While in court I heard about San Diego attorney Noel Meza of Greene Roberts law, violating a court order by disclosing the names of abuse victims of priests. The case number is JCCP 5105 in the San Diego Superior Court. California law is very clear on this issue. In Starbucks Corp. v. Superior Court, 86 Cal. Rptr. 3d 482 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) – the court said “[t]he judicial use of ‘Doe plaintiffs”’ to protect legitimate privacy rights has gained wide currency, particularly given the rapidity and ubiquity of disclosures over the World Wide Web.”
Even in criminal cases, at the victim’s request, the court may order the victim’s identity to be recorded under a pseudonym (Jane or John Doe) in all records and proceedings “if the court finds that such an order is reasonably necessary to protect the privacy of the person and will not unduly prejudice the prosecution or the defense. Cal. Penal Code § 293.5(a)
Despite such, Noel Meza , Greene & Roberts decided to publish the names of abuse victims in open court. Although the judge eventually sealed the material several days later, this does not excuse the conduct of Noel Meza.
Oddly enough, Noel Meza represents the priests in the lawsuit and has since been determined to have a verified criminal record. This is found on the San Diego Superior Court index and have attached a screenshot of it here. Of course encourage you to verify the information as well. I hope this helps the public in understanding attorney ethics and the type of unethical conduct of attorneys when dealing with defending pedo priests.
