Since her lawsuit was filed in May, Eramo has asked Jackie turn over communications related to her alleged rape, but after several unsuccessful attempts, Eramo asked that a court compel Jackie to cooperate. Jackie’s attorneys have argued that their client’s communications should not be turned over for three reasons — they are protected by a rule that precludes evidence related to an alleged sexual assault being admissible in court, they are irrelevant and unduly burdensome to the case, and that communications between Eramo and Jackie are protected by patient-counselor privilege.

In his writings, Conrad disagreed with aspects of each of those arguments; specifically, Conrad noted that the federal rule protecting alleged victims of sexual assault from turning over evidence does not apply in “defamation action involving statements concerning sexual misconduct” if the evidence is deals with the veracity of the alleged offense. Further, Conrad said that rule dealt more with the admissibility of evidence than its discoverability, and that the patient-counselor privilege that Jackie’s attorneys argued for was unmerited, as Virginia Code does not extend that privilege to any authority, and because Jackie’s voluntary disclosure of her communications to Rolling Stone and Erdely would waive that privilege anyway.