Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What primary documents or sources (police reports, court filings, medical records) have reputable outlets cited when reporting on Katie Johnson?
Executive summary
Reputable outlets reporting on “Katie Johnson” (a pseudonym also reported as “Jane Doe”) have primarily cited federal court filings and dockets — especially the April 26, 2016 complaint filed in U.S. District Court (Case No. 5:16‑cv‑00797) — and related docket records archived online (see the complaint text and docket listings) [1] [2]. Major news summaries and books that discuss the allegation point journalists to those court documents and to contemporaneous reporting that noted the lawsuit was filed, refiled and later dropped [3] [4].
1. Court complaint and docket entries: the central primary documents journalists cite
When outlets name primary sources for the Katie Johnson story they most commonly point to the actual federal complaint filed April 26, 2016 and the public docket for Case No. 5:16‑cv‑00797 (Central District of California), which are available in full text and in court‑docket archives; the complaint text is reproduced in online archives and the docket is viewable via CourtListener and other repositories [1] [2] [5]. Law‑oriented services such as Law360 and CourtListener summarize filings and docket activity, and reporters rely on those docket records to track filings, re‑filings and case termination notices [6] [2].
2. How reputable news outlets have used those documents
Mainstream outlets and longform books have used the court filing as the documentary backbone when summarizing the allegation: PBS’s timeline article explicitly links the pseudonym “Jane Doe” to “Katie Johnson” and recounts that a lawsuit alleging rape in 1994 was filed in 2016 and later dropped, citing court filings and reporting [3]. Hachette’s All the President’s Women cites the court documents and quotes from the sections of the filings when describing the allegation and the plaintiff’s claims [4]. El País’s explainer similarly refers to the 2016 suit and frames its coverage around the filings [7].
3. Other public repositories and reproduced copies journalists consult
Beyond court websites, reporters and researchers commonly locate the complaint and related filings via archival mirrors and document hosts: the complaint appears reproduced in the Internet Archive text stream and on sites like PlainSite or archived dockets, which preserve the PDF/text of “Document 1” and other docket entries [1] [8] [5]. Fact‑checking organizations have also archived the complaint to allow verification of the plaintiff’s allegations as stated in court filings [9].
4. What reputable outlets have not widely cited (and where sources are silent)
Available sources do not mention widely‑reported independent police reports, medical records, or public criminal filings tied to Katie Johnson in the material provided; the reporting and the court docket excerpts in these sources focus on civil complaint filings and docket activity rather than on police or medical records [1] [2] [3]. If outlets referenced such records, those citations are not present in the documents and repositories returned in the search results above [1] [2].
5. Secondary reporting and books that amplified the filings — and their perspectives
Books and newspapers have amplified the court filings but framed them differently: Hachette’s All the President’s Women cites the court documents directly and uses them to narrate the plaintiff’s account [4]. PBS used the filings to place the allegation in a broader timeline of assault claims against Donald Trump, noting the use of pseudonyms and the lawsuit’s filing and dismissal [3]. El País’s explainer also summarizes the 2016 filing as source material [7]. These outlets differ in emphasis — some focus on the existence of filings; others place them among many contested allegations — but all point back to the court record as the documentary kernel [4] [3] [7].
6. Caveats, limitations and why journalists stick to court records
Journalists repeatedly rely on court filings because they are verifiable, citable primary sources available in public dockets; the complaint text and docket entries show who filed, when and what was alleged, which is why outlets cite them [1] [2]. However, court complaints are allegations, not adjudications; reporting that relies on them must note whether claims were litigated, settled, withdrawn or dismissed — and several summaries explicitly note the lawsuit was later dropped or refiled and that the plaintiff used a pseudonym [3] [2]. Available sources do not provide final criminal judgments tied to the civil complaint in the material above [1] [2].
7. If you want to verify the source material yourself
Look up Case No. 5:16‑cv‑00797 in the Central District of California docket or the reproduced complaint text stored on archival sites; the April 26, 2016 complaint (Document 1) and subsequent docket entries are reproduced in public archives and on docket aggregator sites cited by news organizations [1] [2] [5]. Law‑oriented services such as Law360 summarize docket activity but the underlying complaint and docket pages are the principal primary documents referenced in major reporting [6] [1].
Limitations: this summary is based only on the set of documents and articles in the provided results; if reputable outlets cited additional police reports, medical records, or sealed filings, those citations are not included in the available materials above [1] [2].