Bonnie Rotten v Max Hardcore the Plot Thickens

Ok this ones weird to me.  Theres an interview done right after her shoot with Max at xcritic  she praises her scene with max saying it was fun and that she is into “Consensual  rape”

So whats with the lawsuit? What does she hope to get in an Illinois County Court? One thing I know about Max is that he is very meticulous about his record keeping. He has the model release.

Well it seems there are also two filings in Los Angeles Superior Court One with Max as the Petitioner as a general title case and one with Bonnie as the petitioner as a civil harassment case

Bonnie Rotten v Max Hardcore

Bonnie Rotten v Max Hardcore 2

109790cookie-checkBonnie Rotten v Max Hardcore the Plot Thickens

Bonnie Rotten v Max Hardcore the Plot Thickens

Share This

21 Responses

  1. I hope Paul beats and win this case against this fucking whore.
    I want Paul’s dick in my ass. He is one good looking cowboy.

  2. In one of the earlier posts about this story it is mentioned that Max has yet to produce any model release. One would think that this would be Max’s first line of defense.

  3. Weird is right. Nothing is making any sense. There’s more going on here, has to be. But who knows what that is. Perhaps time will reveal the true motives behind the legal posturing.

  4. If this ever gets to the discovery stage and depositions begin, you can be assured that Bonnie Rotten will be shown this video and ask to explain under oath what she really meant when she said that she loved consensual rape.

    I’m willing to bet that her attorneys have no idea that there is video of her voluntarily sitting on Max’s lap, and inserting herself into an interview about the scene she just shot.

    They never do.

  5. “In her intentional infliction of emotional distress count, Hicks states she was under the age of 21 and had not yet performed in film at the time she shot the scene with Little. She claims the defendants should have known the release of the scene would cause her “to become distressed.””

    from her Illinois filing…quote and the mysterious Hunsicker quotes re haven’t seen a model release and some post performance agreement that went unsigned With many saying this goes against Max Hardcores usual way of doing business seems to add credence that this was a personal event that was filmed. Then there are his tweets re ‘partying with her’ too.

    Because of his personal preferences I could see how it makes sense to use readily available equipment to cover his ass to ensure a ready willing and able participant didn’t change their mind later. Filming the ‘rape scenario’ or ‘degradation scenario’ to ensure ‘yes meant yes’ wouldn’t require a model release.

    For shoots n giggles lets say he filmed it for CYA then tossed it aside because she wasn’t a performer or repped…he notices she is performing and recalls a memorable evening and offers an agreement to publish what was previously a private film..thats how we get unsigned document.

    he sends her a copy for a signature agreement, she rejects it or wants compensation up front ..yadda back & forth.

    contrary to my initial thoughts that this case was going to be gossip and limited to entertainment value…looks like maybe it’s a situation where both sides have very valid points that simply cant be squared without legal intervention…and no one is really a bad guy here

    Her verifying personal/professional sexual/performance preferences wouldn’t affect having an event documented via filming for personal vs publication as an issue. Last week of October will surely add more juicy details to fuel speculation for this case among others.

  6. If this ever gets to discovery, the very first thing asked of Max will be, please present your model release, and 2257 documentation. Without that, Max is screwed, and it does not make one single bilt of difference what she said after the fact.

    As Mark Speigler is famous for telling his girls,,everything is an act. From the moment you show up to the moment you leave, it is an act. You say the proper lines, you do the proper things, because its all an act. The interview before, the interview after, its all an act. You are in character, you never break character in front of the camera, You love what you’re doing, you love having an old creep throat fuck you, rape you, and stick his cock in your ass then directly down your throat. You love it, because your character loves it.

    Anyone who actually beleives any of these pornstar interviews as being real is living a life of illusion. Its an act people, do you reallly believe these interviews are real? LOL

  7. @BT

    I don’t see it as an issue. If the content in question is a filmed personal encounter there’s a lot of gray area. Her personal preferences match a niche genre but she can argue that her subsequent paid performances are just that…prepared performances vs a filmed personal encounter that might look the same but isn’t. If the niche were gonzo or amateur it would close the door to use Freeman. Since its a niche she can say the content depicts reality including true personal gratification vs her professional scenes featuring simulated arousal and gratification.

    no clue if this or idea that Max may have been playing it safe by filming a personal event and consent to activities and filming for that purpose is near reality or not.

  8. 2257 may be required for each production but that’s easily gotten around placing model signature above date and producer portion. not saying he uses scanned and/or handy copies on record fact the references to an agreement he didn’t sign would lend credence to him obtaining required documentation to publish personal content.

    Not returning signed agreement wouldn’t be an issue unless there were still unresolved contract details when he used her signature and documents to publish.

  9. Under the age of 21 is meaningless. She was over 18, which is the legal age to perform in an adult video. That’s a little like saying, she was 19, three years over the limit to drive, but she shouldn’t have been trusted with an automobile.

    Second, the video in question is filmed at an adult video event. If she’s so delicate, what the heck is she doing at an adult video event. The interviewer says he has interviewed Bonnie Rotten in the past. And she and Max talk about the scene they just filmed together and how hot it was – while she’s sitting on his lap talking about how she likes it rough. Last, she interjected herself into the interview. It’s Max’s show. He didn’t call her over. She walks into the frame, sits on his lap, throws her arm around his shoulders and talks to the camera. She associated herself with him and not the other way around.

    I’m not defending Max – I thought his videos were repellant. But, as of the time of that event, she may have been relatively new to the industry, but she was a known quantity to the adult media; she’s sitting on the lap of a pornographer talking about the scene they just filmed together; and the interviewer says to him and her that he can’t wait to see the scene because he likes seeing her naked.

    In other words, that interview is in the context of Bonnie Rotten, adult film star. And, she’s using Max Hardcore to promote her career.

    That will not be easily explained away under oath. And, I’ll bet a hundred dollars her Illinois attorney had no idea this video was out there.

  10. Ps – the problem with arguing that it’s all an act is this: If she was acting then – and it was pretty convincing – how does the court or a jury if it ever goes anywhere know she’s not acting in front of them.

  11. Agree the under age 21 is one of those over the top not relevant (that I can see) ancillary fluff stuffed into most initial complaints.

    Very curious as to why he filed a Quiet Title which is essentially a hostile takeover of someone else’s property.

    Debating watching video above to see if it was done before or after she started doing contract scenes or if there’s any reference to it as a commercial vs personal event. Generally prefer reading official documents as they tend to designate facts from the initial story presentations. ig its true she was under 21 but it doesn’t substantiate expectation that they should have known she’d be distressed…so it becomes three facts…1. she was under 21…2 she was distressed…3.she expected Max to accommodate her youth (be it immaturity or blissful ignorance etc) Official docs also usually tell a different story than the many offered by litigants to friends & media.

    Re acting…if she makes that argument the outcome would hinge on how convincingly she or attorney presents it. Anna Nicole ring any bells? there’s a situation where there’s 1000 stories for every truth and no way to know which is which.

    Bottom line for me is no matter what or how much speculating happens in the process I’m not willing to label either one at fault before its been adjudicated in the proper forum.

  12. making correction to head off any issues re curiosity about using Quiet title possibly implying he is trying to take what isn’t his. pretty ironic since the Quiet Title that can be used by a vacant house squatter is also how defects of title are cured for everything from typos to missing or incorrect addendum’s to prevent any future claims against the titled property.

    Still think its easier to quiet a noisy title than quiet derogatory judgmental assumptions on one side or the other.

  13. I’ve seen the youtube video and it goes like this. Max calls her over, she sits on his lap and says the whole spiel about consensual rape, etc. That video right there ends this case. Especially if Max still has the model release. If he doesn’t have the model release he may be in a little trouble, but with Bonnie Rotten’s history in the adult industry, especially performing in hardcore scenes, this is going to be a tough case for her to win.

    As for her FAN BASE. I would never watch this girl again. She is pretty much telling us with this lawsuit she doesn’t enjoy what she does. Granted, maybe many of these girls don’t but at least act like you do because as a viewer it’s a huge turn off. I actually like watching Bonnie Rotten videos, and I thought she has been gaining huge steam since her big win at AVN’s this year.

    With this lawsuit I think you will see some of her fan base move on to better and more authentic hardcore performers.

  14. so its like a cosy version of person answering CYA questions presented by off screen voice in a green room post event ??? like look ma i’m fine 🙂

    “but with Bonnie Rotten’s history in the adult industry”

    Will probably be to both their advantages that even if folks like their niche ..they’re too busy using it to get away from office gossip & politics to worry about crap behind the scenes.

    Big part of the game is painting each other in worst light possible and presenting best personal profile on paper and if it ever gets that court.

    its a shame that doing what you gotta do affects lively-hood…fan base stuff is probably spot on….also expect that women’s rights anti-rape crusaders will have a field day with both of them too if they get a whif of cases.

  15. Whenever I write something like what I’m about to write, even I groan and roll my eyes because nothing ever seems to happen in porn. But, I can’t help myself. Feel free to tell me I’m way off base. That said, if I were porn, this is the kind of suit that would make me worried in the event that Bonnie Rotten does prevail on something other than a contract dispute. For example, if she prevails and wins money because she was under 21, Max should have known better, he’s known for humiliating his talent, etc., that opens the door for every disgruntled newbie to say: I didn’t know what I was doing; the industry should have looked after me. I think it would also put at risk agents who send talent that is under 21 on certain shoots.

    Again, this is porn, where the owner of a production company shoots off guns and keeps cocaine on the premises where his directors hogtie, ball gag and cane talent, so what do I know.

Leave a Reply