Mayor's attorney: 'Case should be dropped' after doctor examined genitalia

An attorney for the mayor made what he called "a game changing announcement" in the lawsuit, going public about private parts of the mayor's anatomy in an effort to clear his name.

Susannah Frame, KING 4:55 PM. PDT April 12, 2017

If you're reading this story in the KING 5 app, click here.

The attorney for Mayor Ed Murray said Tuesday that a physical examination of his client proves a lawsuit alleging sexual abuse is without basis.

Attorney Bob Sulkin released medical records from an examination of Murray's genitals during a press conference at his downtown Seattle office.

Examination of Murray performed by his personal physician Dr. Craig Pepin from the @thepolyclinic. He is a general practitioner.
— Susannah Frame (@SFrameK5) April 11, 2017

.@MayorEdMurray attorney Bob Sulkin: "The case should be dropped. There's no credibility anymore. D.H. misled his own lawyers."
— Susannah Frame (@SFrameK5) April 11, 2017

Last week, a plaintiff identified only by the initials D.H. filed a civil lawsuit alleging that Murray abused him sexually in the 1980s. The plaintiff was a minor at the time, and his lawsuit alleges that Murray paid him for sex on multiple occasions.

The lawsuit includes D.H.'s description of Murray's penis. D.H. "had a distinctive genital region, including reddish pubic hair and a unique mole on his scrotum – it is a small bump."

Sulkin said Murray was examined Tuesday morning by his own general doctor at the Polyclinic in Seattle. That examination, Sulkin said, showed no mole or bump or evidence of a removed mole on the mayor's genitals.

"This is game-changing," Sulkin said. "This is the heart of the allegations, and they are false. The complaint is meritless and now proven to be as such."

With the medical report, Murray reiterated the accusations "should be laid to rest."

“Without offering any evidence, the accuser has described me in very specific and intimate detail, and his accusation depends on these descriptions being accurate," Murray said in a statement. "If this description is inaccurate, the accusation cannot be credible."

Sulkin said although D.H. provided other details, such as the layout of Murray's apartment and the Mayor's phone number 20 years ago, descriptions about Murray's genitalia was the crux of the accuser's case. Sulkin claimed D.H. "provided false information to his own lawyers," and as a result, Sulkin said the entire case against his client "is gutted."

"This was the fingerprint. OK?" Sulkin said. "This is why it was put in, and it's false."

D.H.'s attorney Lincoln C. Beauregard said after the press conference he would be exploring the need for an independent examination. Sulkin said he's "not against a fair analysis" by a third party doctor if a judge ordered it.

"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 in a statement.