In a new filing submitted to federal court this week, Los Angeles Country attorneys claim the late NBA star's widow is "subjecting first responders to harassment and threats."
The accusations come after Vanessa named the four sheriff's officers who allegedly flashed pictures of the helicopter crash scene, which took the lives of Kobe, their 13-year-old daughter, Gigi, and seven others on January 26, 2020.
Vanessa filed a lawsuit in September against the police department, claiming several deputies of taking and leaking images of the tragic scene, as well as "showing off" photos of her husband and daughter's dead bodies.
The county is now fighting back.
In the filing, they accuse Kobe's widow of going too far and using a “scorched earth” search for information on the four cops.
"This straightforward case, with undisputed facts, has turned into a fishing expedition that is taking first responders away from their jobs — and subjecting them to public harassment and threats," the documents filed this week read.
Adding that “defendants are eager to have their day in Court and put an end to this.”
Vanessa Bryant's lawsuit seeks to punish those responsible for allegedly leaking the photos and “make an example of them to the community."
She claims the named cops shared the graphic photos of her deceased family "without any legitimate governmental purpose."
Kobe's widow has asked the court to allow her more time to gather information, evidence, and conduct witness depositions.
Vanessa wants the cutoff date of discovery moved from August to February.
The county claims that Vanessa has no basis for her lawsuit.
They allege “only government personnel and one friend saw the photographs in question," which they say is reasoning enough to deny her extension request.
“Plaintiff has dedicated countless hours to meaningless discovery disputes and posting recklessly about the Defendants on social media—all while taking the position that her 50 depositions cannot begin until she has every single document in the County’s possession,” the county’s filing stated. “That is not diligence. There is no basis for modifying the scheduling order.”