Case closed — false rape accuser Leigh Raven alters course; now trying on the hat of advocate for the adult community
The Los Angeles Police Department’s Devonshire Division confirmed Friday that the case it opened in March concerning adult performer Leigh Raven‘s claim of being abused and assaulted during the filming of a sex scene is now officially closed, and that the District Attorney has rejected the case for prosecution.
Ever since Raven, in a YouTube video produced by her partner Nikki Hearts, told her bizarre and shocking story of alleged abuse and intimidation by a veteran male performer and director, every single person involved with the shoot other than Raven has rejected her claims as fantasy. Now the police and the District Attorney’s office, neutral bodies tasked with evaluating evidence, including the veracity of witnesses, have also concluded that Leigh Raven was lying and that there was no assault on the set of the March 6 production.
Or, to put it another way: in the era of #MeToo, after evaluating all the evidence presented, a female police detective decided she did not not even need to interview the man Leigh Raven accused of sexual assault. And on April 18, the D.A. rejected the case based on the lack of evidence that a crime had been committed.
Moreover, at the time of his notification, police confirmed that Just Dave was never even a suspect, only a potential witness.
I repeat, based on the report Raven filed with police, director Just Dave was never even a suspect in any crime.
Let that sink in, and then consider the report filed by AVN‘s Peter Warren on Friday.
I’ve had this story since early June, when Just Dave was notified that the case had been closed and informed that he could pick up the original video elements from the shoot, which he had voluntarily handed to police after watching Raven and Hearts’ video.
But Dave wanted AVN to clear his name first. As anyone who’s read Warren’s trash fire of a story realizes, it didn’t work out quite that way. (I personally had my doubts that Peter Warren would ever want to be seen as being mean to a female performer.)
Warren’s story is misleadingly titled, “Leigh Raven Not Pursuing Legal Action in Just Dave Case”. There are several problems with this construction of events.
By her own admission, Raven “had many attorneys hear my story and offer to take my case.” She implies that after seeking out these many attorneys she then turned them down because “I don’t want money.” I call bullshit on that. No one takes meetings with attorneys because they don’t want to sue. To quote an immortal line from 1995’s “Crimson Tide”:
“Not pursuing legal action”? We have it on excellent authority she was shopping the case around.
In the eyes of the adult world and the public at large, Raven’s charges were effectively debunked — devastated — by the release of nanny cam video of the video shoot, which did not show any of the events that Raven, in a YouTube video shot by her wife Nikki Hearts, had claimed occurred.
We must logically conclude that, after seeing the nanny cam video evidence, and weighing Raven’s credibility, no legitimate lawyer believed in the case.
So, for Leigh Raven to say, after failing to get either the D.A. or a civil attorney to back her, that she doesn’t want to sue is as ridiculous as 19th century U.S. statesman Henry Clay quipping, after running for president three times without winning, (as well as seeking the nomination two more times), “I’d rather be right than president.”
The second problem with the headline to Warren’s story is, even if true it’s the wrong headline. The event — the news event — that precipitated the story was the vindication of Just Dave and Rico Strong. The news headline is: after weighing the evidence, the D.A. doesn’t think there’s enough there to convict anyone of any crime.
Smoke and fire
There’s a technique employed by many writers, born of laziness if not ineptitude, which dictates that soliciting a set of block quotes from one side of a story and then matching them up against quotations from the other side equals an article. Sadly, it does not, just as Billy Joel’s “We Didn’t Start the Fire“ forever proved that a list is not a song.
But at the time of that song’s creation, Joel was a former A-list writer whose muse had abandoned him, What can we say of Warren? None of the possibilities are pleasant.
The gist of Raven’s statements to police were that a white girl had been raped by a big black man, Rico Strong.
Raven insults Rico Strong by calling him dumb or “ignorant”. Having gotten the man thrown out of work but not quite lynched, in her statements to AVN‘s Warren, Leigh Raven shifts the focus to the director, Just Dave.
“I don’t want money,” Raven said. “I want people like Just Dave removed from the porn community.”
Raven, a liar who filed a false rape and assault report, and also a complaint with Cal/OSHA, is trying to cast herself as an activist fighting or the rights of her fellow performers.
I haven’t laughed so hard sine I was a little girl.
It’s much more likely that Raven has realized that going to the police and Cal/OSHA over this was a huge mistake and used Warren’s article to correct that by saying she wants to move on, she didn’t want anyone arrested, and is not filing a civil suit because she’s not about the money.
Raven continued to AVN: “I want this production to be shut down. This is not what porn is, and I hope no other girl has to endure the hell I have been through.”
“This is not what porn is”? Really? Who made Leigh Raven pope?
Ms. Raven, is this what porn is?
Or, is this what porn is?
Interestingly, Warren declined to use another quote of Raven’s, which was provided to MikeSouth.com by a third party source before the AVN story ran, in which she repeated her ridiculous claim that “incriminating footage” that shows “elements of distress” was edited from the nanny cam video that was released by the director.
“I was on set for 6 hours. Footage released is about 2 hrs 45 min. In these missing gaps, am I forced on the floor and punched in the face? No. But they do show elements of distress. Incriminating footage … or why would it be removed?”
In this statement, Raven is assuming facts not in evidence. No footage was removed, as any viewing of the video makes clear. Furthermore, to believe that the video was brilliantly edited is to believe that Raven was abused, tormented and “distressed”, then went right back to smiling and laughing — for hours — and then lied during her exit interview.
Raven would also have you believe either that trained police investigators ignored these allegedly deleted sequences when they viewed the original video elements, or alternatively, that these investigators were duped by Just Dave, and that he is guilty of obstructing a police investigation, conspiracy, and more (and that the L.A. police are too stupid to figure this out).
This editorial choice aside, Warren’s AVN piece is essentially one long unchallenged Leigh Raven quote. Just Dave, who prompted this mess when he contacted Warren, only deigned to respond to one of Raven’s remarks, namely:
“I believe blame for my incident and the many others out there lies on Just Dave. He is knowingly tricking girls into what they think is a ‘rough scene’ and leaving them physically and emotionally broken.”
Just Dave’s response effectively contradicts Raven’s assertions about him being unconcerned with issues of consent on set:
First of all, there was no “incident” on set.
On any professional shoot the people behind the camera, and in front of the camera, must respect all stated boundaries and matters concerning consent at all times. We also have a duty, for the sake of everyone concerned, to define terms and boundaries by being as clear as possible with what is expected. On that set we followed these rules without exception.
I do not trick anyone into working for me. In this particular instance, the male talent was friends with her, contacted her and told her about the scene. After she enthusiastically accepted the gig, my production assistant called her and again described the scene in detail, clearly identifying the nature of the scene.
Once she arrived on set, my production assistant again spoke to her about the scene. At this stage, if a performer shows discomfort or has any issue with the requirements of a scene we send them home. But she again agreed.
Then, with the cameras rolling I went through the requirements of the scene one more time I personally went point by point in detail what the scene was about and obtained her clear consent. The video shows us determining her ‘do’s and don’ts’ in great detail, and explaining that the procedure for having filming stop if ever she felt uncomfortable for any reason was merely to say “stop”, “don’t” or “cut”. As you can see in the video, I emphasized this.
And as the video clearly shows, at no time did she ever complain of inappropriate behavior, or ask for the scene to stop or the cameras to cut.
This is the crux of the entire matter. From his statement it is apparent that Dave understands how important matters of consent are to porn production. He acknowledges the rules, and explains precisely how they were followed.
But Warren gives the last word to Raven.
“[I] can go on for hours about every detail and prove that I am telling the truth … but why is the victim even being questioned?”
Do you believe this crap? Peter Warren allows a false rape accuser to call herself the victim — not even an alleged victim. But Just Dave and Rico are called “the alleged perpetrators” in the lede — a phrase which implies that there was in fact a crime perpetrated.
Leigh Raven had months to go over “every detail” but refused to do so, even to AVN last week.
And because of this fact I wonder whether Peter Warren’s story was intended as a sort of subtle think piece: one in which the reader instead of the author will do the math, and from which they will walk away doubting Raven because she refused to answer any hard questions.
The charges made by Raven and Hearts were, on their face, extraordinary, and as the late writer Christopher Hitchens famously remarked, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.”
Since Leigh’s on-set assault story was a fabrication, Leigh could not answer questions about “every detail”. So the strategy became one of defiant claims of victimhood — she would not answer questions about it for to do so would constitute “re-victimizing” her. It was a rape simply because Leigh said it was, and because Hearts, who knew her better than anyone, agreed.
So, Hearts backed Leigh in prepared statements on social media. An example: Hearts admitted that the nanny cam video of the shoot is exculpatory on its face, but said that doesn’t matter.
By lending Raven credibility in the face of hard evidence to the contrary, and the complete absence of evidence in support, Peter Warren has essentially — shamefully — adopted this ridiculous line.
After the shoot, Hearts took Raven to the police, where she field a report. She also filed a complaint with Cal-OSHA.
After the Nikki’s YouTube video was published online, Just Dave went to see the police at Devonshire Division. The detectives wanted to speak with him about the case, so Raven must have leveled charges that at least approximate what she claims in the video.
We now know that Raven went after Rico Strong in her statements to the police, as they considered Just Dave a potential witness only.
These were severe allegations of extremely wanton and bold behavior: that a young woman was horrifically abused in a workplace setting.
Because there exist videos, documentation, and at least three eyewitnesses to the events of March 6. The police would, as a matter of procedure, request to review whatever materials Dave possessed.
But Just Dave walked out of that police station after screening the video. And no other witnesses were brought in.
The only way Dave and Rico would have remained uncharged after that video was played for them, in the face of the heinous allegations made against them, was that the original video elements do not show events as Raven described them.