OCT 26, 2022: "Jane Doe" initiated a federal civil lawsuit against former IBF 130-pound champion Joseph "JoJo" Diaz Jr. in April in the Central District of California. Doe alleges that when she was still a minor, Diaz texted her an unsolicited picture of his penis. The alleged victim says she reported Diaz to the police, but the police declined to pursue criminal charges. The civil lawsuit asserts claims for coercion and enticement and seeks $150,000 in damages, plus attorneys' fees. Diaz has submitted an answer denying any liability, but not necessarily denying that the picture was sent to a minor. Diaz is fighting Wiliam Zepeda this weekend in San Diego.

 

The lawsuit, filed by attorney Rajan O. Dhungana, **alleges** as follows:

 

Diaz has engaged in a practice and pattern of soliciting minor females to engage in coitus [sexual intercourse]. His pattern and practice is to send unsolicited pictures of his genitalia through social media platforms. Upon information and belief there are at least four victims of his predatory activity in multiple jurisdictions.

 

Diaz has had numerous and recent contacts with the criminal justice system, ranging from alcohol-related incidents to domestic violence inflicting significant injury. [Editor's note: Boxingtalk has not independently verified this allegation]. Diaz has also publicly described his history with mental health issues. In sum, this individual is a troubled predator and must be held accountable for his actions.

 

[Jane Doe], a minor at the time of receipt, reported the unlawful transmission of sexually graphic material from Diaz to Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department (LASD) on or about September 20, 2021. The investigation consisted of the LASD speaking with Mr. Diaz, who admitted that the photo existed on his phone, that the photo was indeed a photo of himself and his genitalia, and then blamed his 'girlfriend' for sending the offending photo, acknowledging that it had been sent to [Doe]. LASD concluded that this was a 'mistake' and refused to undertake any further investigative efforts. LASD also questioned why the victim would report the offending conduct because Diaz “seemed like a nice kid.”

 

Blaming or shaming a victim is an unfortunate plague that has compromised the criminal justice system, resulting in actual predators, as in this case, escaping accountability. [Doe] did not ask or want to be contacted by this predator, and she has mustered the courage to come forward because she wants him to be held accountable and hopefully prevent the further victimization of other young girls.

 

On September 3, 2020, Diaz sent Doe a photograph of himself in which his penis, bare chest, and face were all visible. It was an unsolicited photograph with his erect penis in full view. Doe was 17 years old at the time. Doe did not view the photograph until the next morning because her parents routinely held the minor children’s cellphones in the house each evening.

 

This photograph was sent through the social media application Snapchat. Ordinarily, when the recipient opens a Snapchat message or photograph, the sender can see that it was opened and viewed. A Snapchat message or photograph generally disappears a few seconds after being opened unless the recipient screenshots the communication or takes a photograph of it using another device. The recipient can bypass this feature by partially sliding the message prior to opening. Doe regularly did this when receiving Snapchat messages and did so upon receiving the message from Diaz.

 

Shocked and upset, Doe immediately sought her mother’s assistance. Doe’s mother opened the offending Snapchat and took a photograph of the sexually graphic material with another phone to preserve the evidence. 

 

This was Doe’s first contact with Diaz via social media. Diaz was previously in a relationship with Doe’s older sister. The sister began dating Diaz in 2010, when Doe was 7 years of age.  Based on Diaz's history with Doe's family, Diaz knew that she was a minor at that time.

 

After Doe’s mother took a picture of the obscenity, she called Doe’s father [who] then called Diaz's father to inform him that his adult son sent the sexually graphic material to his minor daughter.

 

Diaz’s father confirmed that it was his son in the photograph and that it was sent to Doe from his son’s phone. The father asserted that Diaz had “mistakenly” sent the photograph to Doe because he had been heavily drinking the night before.

 

On or about September 20, 2021, Doe filed a police report with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.

 

On or about November 30, 2021, the detective assigned to the case called Doe’s father. During this conversation, the detective stated that Diaz claimed his girlfriend accessed his Snapchat account and sent the photograph to Doe. 

 

The detective also told Doe’s father that Diaz “seemed like a nice kid.” It was clear to Doe and her father that law enforcement was not taking this matter seriously. LASD concluded that transmission of the sexually graphic photograph was nothing more than a “mistake,” and declined any further investigation.

 

Upon knowledge and belief, [Doe alleges that] Diaz has a pattern and practice of seeking out individuals who have not attained the age of 18 for sexual relationships. 

 

Diaz sent sexually graphic material, a photograph of himself fully naked, with an erect penis. A reasonable person, with or without knowledge Defendant’s pattern and practice of seeking out minors for sexual relationships, would view the purpose of this conduct as an attempt to arouse, appeal to, or gratify the lust or passions of himself by enticing Doe to engage in sexual activity with him. Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 288.3, it is a criminal offense to contact or communicate, or attempt to contact or communicate, with a person known to be or believed to be a minor with the intent to commit [such an] offense.

 

Diaz filed an answer to the complaint, signed by himself, but he has not retained an attorney to appear on his behalf.  Among the defenses asserted by Diaz are that "[Doe]’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, because Diaz's conduct was in good faith, innocent and with non-willful intent" and also because Diaz "lacked the mental capacity at the time the wrongful conduct alleged in the Complaint occurred."

 

A trial is scheduled for next November (2023) and neither Diaz, nor an attorney representing him, appeared at a court conference earlier this month. Doe claims that Diaz also submitted a false address when filing his answer.