This spring, a civil lawsuit was filed by dozens of John, Jane, and Child Does housed at the Tulsa County Detention Center. It alleges wide-ranging systemic abuse, including denied medical treatment, deliberate poisoning, excessive confinement, drug offerings, and rape.A new court document filed by defendants, which include the Board of County Commissioners, Judge Kevin Gray, and former and current detention center staff, wants some Doe pseudonyms to use initials in public documents instead.They are asking that all but six alleged victims be named by initials partly because they claim abuse but not physical sexual assault.Why do we need to do that? asked Chris Brecht of Smolen Law, who represents the minors and parents. Who gets to decide what level of abuse is bad enough that they get to have absolute privacy versus kind of privacy?For example, defense attorneys object to Child Doe 5 using that pseudonym. Child Doe 5 does not allege rape, but alleges sexual harassment and propositions. They also allege they were forced to tell another child to use Vaseline prior to getting raped so it wouldnt hurt. The lawsuit also alleges Child Doe 5 witnessed the rape. The public documents also specify a five-month time frame that Child Doe 5 was housed at the facility.Brecht believes this latest court filing is a bully tactic to scare the kids out of being involved in the lawsuit.Because when you have one or two or three kids say something bad happened, it doesnt carry the weight of 30 kids all saying the same thing, he said.Because some of the clients alleging abuse are still housed at the facility that currently houses roughly 30 juveniles, Brecht believes that limited pool is identity revealing if initials are used.Pretty brazen that the entities that were supposed to protect them in the first place are continuing to bully them for standing up for themselves, he said.2 News emailed six of the Tulsa-based attorneys representing the defendants for their response. We heard back from one, Keith Wilkes, who represents the Board of County Commissioners.The Board of County Commissioners fully supports preserving the anonymity of all juveniles represented in this case, he wrote, indicating that federal rules point to initials providing anonymity.The court document maintains that there need to be exceptional circumstances to warrant the use of pseudonyms.Brecht maintains using pseudonyms is a common practice and calls the move game-playing. Stay in touch with us anytime, anywhere -- Download our free app for Apple, Android and Kindle devices. Sign up for daily newsletters emailed to you Like us on Facebook Follow us on Instagram SUBSCRIBE on YouTube