International Courant
On Feb. 29, ex-“Vanderpump Guidelines” star Rachel Leviss filed an explosive lawsuit towards her former castmates Tom Sandoval and Ariana Madix for eavesdropping, revenge porn, invasion of privateness and intentional infliction of emotional misery. On the core of Leviss’ lawsuit is Sandoval’s recording of “sexually specific movies of her with out her data or consent, which have been then distributed, disseminated, and mentioned publicly by a scorned girls in search of revenge, catalyzing the scandal.”
Though Leviss is just not suing Bravo, NBCUniversal or Evolution, the manufacturing firm behind “Vanderpump Guidelines,” the lawsuit, filed by her attorneys Bryan Freedman and Mark Geragos, claims these corporations “sanitized the story to make sure Leviss could be seen because the arch- villain.”
However in contradiction to a part of Leviss’ swimsuit, Selection has reviewed an electronic mail from her former lawyer dated March 6, 2023. Within the letter, despatched to Evolution’s guardian firm, MGM, Leviss’ then-lawyer insisted that the “proper factor” to won’t air any dialogue of the recording of Leviss.
“Giving life to a recording that was illegally obtained by permitting dialogue of it on-air could be tantamount to rewarding somebody for robbing a financial institution or taking pictures somebody,” wrote Lawrence M Kopeikin, who represented Leviss throughout this era. “We’d hope that Evolution and Bravo have ample character and restraint to not air any dialogue of this illegally obtained recording.”
Requested to touch upon this obvious discrepancy, Freedman — Leviss’ present lawyer — wrote: “Clearly, you do not perceive what this case is about? In the event you did perceive the precise authorized declare, you wouldn’t be asking questions on a letter despatched to a manufacturing firm that isn’t even named as a defendant within the criticism. This case is about Revenge Porn arising from illegally recording and disseminating a sexual video with out the data or consent of our consumer. It isn’t solely a civil improper however probably against the law. Let me know in the event you care to ask a query in regards to the case that’s really being litigated.”
When contacted by Selection, Kopeikin confirmed he now not represents Leviss, and spokespeople for NBCUniversal and MGM declined to remark.
The video in query of Leviss and Sandoval was briefly talked about within the finale of Season 10 of “Vanderpump Guidelines,” which was filmed spontaneously after the information of Leviss and Sandoval’s affair broke in early March 2023.
Within the Could 17 episode, with out detailing its contents, Madix describes (utilizing “Raquel,” Leviss’ previously most popular first identify) how she’d present in Sandoval’s digicam roll “a display recording of Raquel and Tom on Facetime.” Her discovery served because the catalyst for the so-called Scandoval, the dishonest scandal that propelled “Vanderpump Guidelines” into the zeitgeist and the scores stratosphere final 12 months. The character of the video Madix had discovered wasn’t broadly identified till March 7, 2023, when a TMZ story with the headline “‘VANDERPUMP RULES’ RAQUEL LEVISS INTIMATE FACETIME SESH WITH TOM … She Says Was Recorded With out Permission” went viral, after members of the forged had been despatched letters warning them to not share the video.
In Leviss’ Feb. 29 lawsuit, filed in LA County Superior Courtroom, her attorneys declare {that a} key aspect of a scene between Leviss and Sandoval was edited out — at Sandoval’s insistence. In line with the lawsuit, throughout a scene at Leviss’ house on March 4, 2023, “Leviss confronted Sandoval for secretly recording pornographic movies of her and storing them unprotected on his cellphone” on digicam.
“Sandoval had not solely invaded her privateness and breached her belief, however had additionally left her enormously weak to a nightmare situation of the movies leaking on the web,” the lawsuit reads. “Sandoval responded to Leviss’ fury with cowardice and lies, claiming falsely that he had obtained her permission to file her. Seeing that Leviss was having none of it, nevertheless, Sandoval in the end provided a reluctant admission and a sheepish apology.”
The lawsuit cites media experiences that Sandoval threatened to cease filming until he was “granted enhancing rights over the scene. Shockingly, Bravo and Evolution obliged his demand. The scene was selectively edited to omit any point out of Sandoval’s illicit recording or Leviss’ lack of consent.”
The lawsuit goes on. “This was a part of a sample and apply of Bravo and Evolution throwing Leviss underneath the bus in favor of Sandoval,” it states. “Recording somebody engaged in intercourse acts with out their consent is against the law, and Sandoval seems to have admitted it on digicam. Portraying the confrontation because it really occurred as a substitute of defending sleazy Sandoval wouldn’t solely have been truthful, it might have additionally been ‘good tv.’ However Bravo and Evolution apparently determined that Leviss could be their sacrificial lamb.”
Within the scene because it performed out within the Could 17 finale, filmed on March 4, at her house, Leviss and Sandoval commiserate about what’s occurred, specific regrets about how they might have executed issues in another way and agree to not kiss on digicam. They then profess their love to one another. “I really feel so remoted,” Leviss says as Sandoval embraces her. After the scene ends, a chyron says, “After filming this scene, Raquel turned off her cellphone and was not seen or heard from for weeks.”
The March 6, 2023 letter from Leviss’ then-lawyer begins by acknowledging that the key affair between Leviss and Sandoval could be featured on the present, and could be “the topic of on-camera dialogue among the many forged of ‘Vanderpump Guidelines.’ ”
Kopeikin then informs the corporate that Sandoval had “illegally recorded an intimate Facetime trade,” which is illegitimate underneath California legislation. He provides that they assume “a number of forged members have shared this recording amongst themselves, which is a violation of a number of California statutes, together with with out limitation, California Penal Code Part 647(J)(4) (the so-called ‘revenge porn ‘legislation).”
The letter goes on to say that they “know that Bravo wouldn’t air any a part of this recording (whether or not blurred or pixelated or in any other case obscured) since that would topic Evolution/MGM and Bravo to doable civil and legal legal responsibility.” However Kopeikin tells the corporate that it is “inappropriate for Evolution and Bravo to placed on air any dialogue among the many forged of this illegally obtained recording.” Right here we’re drawing a distinction between dialogue of the affair between Raquel and Tom Sandoval, which we perceive will likely be mentioned on the present, as differentiated from a dialogue of an illegally obtained recording which we really feel shouldn’t be mentioned on the present.”
Addressing the MGM government, Kopeikin writes: “We’d hope that Evolution and Bravo have ample character and restraint to not air any dialogue of this illegally obtained recording. That is particularly necessary given the character of this illegally obtained recording. As soon as you’ve got had a possibility to debate this with Evolution and Bravo we’d recognize your confirming that dialogue of this illegally obtained recording won’t be aired on the present.”
Kopeikin closes with this.
“Thanks and the folks at Evolution and Bravo upfront on your understanding and for doing the best factor.”
Rachel Leviss’ Ex Lawyer Requested To not Air Intercourse Tape Chat
World Information,Subsequent Massive Factor in Public Knowledg
