Exam Of Seattle Mayor's Genitals Disproves Sex Abuse Accusations, Lawyer Says

SEATTLE, WA - Seattle Mayor Ed Murray's attorney is calling for a lawsuit against the mayor to be dropped after he released the results of a physical examination of the mayor's body on Tuesday. In a lawsuit filed last Thursday, a Kent man - who goes by the initials "D.H." in the suit - described several distinguishing marks on Murray's body, including on his genitals. But Murray's attorney, Robert Sulkin, said Tuesday that a recent exam by a doctor proves that those marks aren't there.

In the lawsuit, which alleges that Murray paid for sex with the 15-year-old in 1986, D.H. claims that Murray has red pubic hair, freckles on his chest, and a mole-like bump on his scrotum. Murray underwent a physical at the Polyclinic on Tuesday morning, which turned up no such mark on Murray's scrotum, Sulkin said.

"This is the heart of the allegations and they're false," Sulkin said. "The complaint is merit-less and now proven to be such."

Murray has denied the accusations since they came to light. The exam was performed by gastroenterologist Dr. Craig J. Pepin, who also noted that there did not appear to be any surgery scars on the mayor's body.

Lincoln Beauregard, D.H.'s attorney, responded to Sulkin's press conference Tuesday night. He said that he and his client look forward to arguing the case "in the appropriate venue," and was skeptical that the mayor had used his own personal doctor for the exam.

"If the mayor's mole doesn't fit the description as observed by D.H. and another victim who tried to come forward in 2008, why didn't the mayor just say so at his first press conference on Friday?" Beauregard said.

Murray spoke out publicly about the accusations on Friday, saying that he would remain in office, and would still run for reelection this year.

During the Tuesday press conference, Sulkin took a shot at the Seattle Times, whose reporters broke the story last week. Sulkin said the paper was "unfair to the mayor" for not allowing him to debunk the story before publishing.

Image via Creative Commons