Adult film performer and producer Michael Lucas is on a crusade to prove that he absolutely, positively did not leave “urine, semen and fecal matter” all over an Airbnb rental.
Last week, Lucas was slapped with a $30,000 lawsuit for allegedly trashing a nearly 100-year-old Spanish revival mansion in California during an August porn shoot, leaving behind bodily fluids, used enema kits, and dildos, according to property owner Kristina Knapic.
“Plaintiff has not, and does not, rent the property for the purposes of filming adult pornographic movies,” the lawsuit read. “Such an image is not one plaintiff wants associated with her pristine home.”
But in an exclusive statement made to Queerty, Lucas denied the allegations, accusing Knapic of being a “professional extortionist” and claiming her “pristine home” isn’t nearly as pristine as she’d like people to believe.
Related: Gay Porn Maven Michael Lucas Is On PrEP, Thinks You Should Be Too
“Here’s the truth,” Lucas told us, “the house has a unique and unadvertised feature: a fairly well-equipped sex dungeon in the basement, complete with a
sex swing, whips, chains and miscellaneous bondage paraphernalia.”
But don’t just take his word for it. Lucas has uploaded video of the sex dungeon to YouTube, which he says is complete with a sex swing, whips, chains and other “weird dungeon-y shit.”
See the video below.
William Meyer
Ray Ivey
To be fair, who hasn’t done this?
moldisdelicious
That has nothing to do to disprove the claims she’s brought up against him.
KevinG
From th evidence he’s produced already, I’m inclined to believe that he didn’t trash the place like she claims. But did he actually film pornography there without a location release? It’s the one allegation he’s been silent on. Renting a property doesn’t automatically include using it for commercial purposes, especially filming.
The presence of a dungeon isn’t relevant.
redcarpet30
@moldisdelicious: It does if it shows him leaving the house in good condition. And his txt messages after he left the house corroborates his story. And there were other reports of her on Yelp pulling the same shit with other people. I’m not a Lucas fan, but I’m inclined to believe him in this case.
alphacentauri
@moldisdelicious: He’s a scat queen. LOL
Bryguyf69
This video has nothing to do with the allegations. I’ve never been to a sex dungeon but as far as I know, few contain velvet sofas. And most have chains and things hanging off walls and the ceiling. Except for the alleged sex swing, it looks more like a basement full of props for a horror movie shoot.
Furthermore, I tend to think that it’s not a sex dungeon since it was opened to the renters. What landlord would leave a sex dungeon unlocked, when most renters would likely be shocked by it?
Lucas is stupid to post this video because its release bolsters the landlord’s claim that Lucas is ruining her reputation. In other words, she may have an additional claim against him — especially if she can prove that it’s not a sex dungeon. If so, she can sue for slander or libel, or even both, depending on the medium.
Bryguyf69
@KevinG: Exactly. In the prevous Queerty post on the topic, I pointed out that 1) Renting a property does not entitle one to use it for commercial purposes. This includes something as innocent as selling lemonade and Girl Scout Cookies. 2) The landlord has to give explicit permission for him to use the property’s image or likeness in commercial media. Lucas has violated both. An interesting legal question is whether he can bypass #2 by digitally altering the background so that her property is no longer recognizable.
Regardless of whether she gets $30,000, he is already financially screwed. He has to pay the 10 actors even if the video is legally blocked from release. Given his poor reputation among gays, I suspect that he’ll try to weasel out of fully paying. Then you’ll really have a legal Battle Royale pitting the landlord vs Michael Lucas vs 10 porn actors.
Bryguyf69
@redcarpet30: No, it doesn’t. If you read her actual complaint, you’d see that the stuff she claims would easily escape any casual video recording. For example, she claims that there were sex toys and enema kits inside drawers and trash. Was there footage of drawer interiors? Furthermore, she claims that that many fluid stains were detected under UV light. Was there footage where Lucas used UV lighting? And frankly, fecal and urine stains aren’t easily visible unless you zoom in on the linen or other fabric. The only thing a generic video can show is that there was no widespread damage, i.e. holes in the wall, toppled furniture, etc. So no, Lucas has not disproved her claims.
Likewise for the walk-through and text messages. I’ve seen walk-throughs and they’re no more that a quick scan to make sure there is no major damage. You certainly wouldn’t notice body fluids (especially ones that are only visible under UV light). Nor are the Yelp reviews relevant to her claims. She being a bad landlord doesn’t mean he was a good tenant.
The big question is whether she saved video and DNA evidence before scrubbing the place clean. Merely showing UV-lit stains on the wall doesn’t prove that they resulted from Lucas’ stay. The enema tips and dildos should also have fecal DNA. It will be interesting to see if the actors will cooperate with her by willingly proving DNA samples or eyewitness statements. After all, they’re not being sued. And if Lucas refuses to pay them (see my above post), you can bet that they’ll join her camp. As I’ve said, Lucas is screwed, no matter what.
Bryguyf69
@Bryguyf69: The presence of a smoke machine, which the narrator stupidly mentions, just bolsters my belief that it’s a storage space for theatrical props.
dr35
I still find it funny that after all of this he’s still bickering about the fact it has a sex room in the basement when he should in fact be denying her allegations. Whether or not she has a unique basement room doesn’t excuse you trashing the place and leaving the remnants of your porn set around the house.
I feel like he probably assumed a maid would clean up, seeing as there’s a $200 deposit. He probably just didn’t figure she’s sue for $30k
dr35
I also agree with @bryguyf69. Merely pointing out a basement full of props fails to prove it’s a “sex dungeon”, nor does it disprove her claim of bodily fluids all over the place. This guy is such a piece of work.
SonOfKings
This is a bad llok for Michael Lucas. The “sex dungeon” defense is not credible and he has a bad reputation. With that said there are a couple of tjings I do like about him. He does not ask his models to do anything on camera that he does not also do. He occasionally emplys black models in non-stereotypical situations. And he maintains his body hair. All good things. He did phuck up his face though.
Cam
So to prove he didn’t film a video there, he releases a short video that he filmed there.
James Rumsey
If you rent a “romantic getaway” as she describes it you expect couples to have sex so there will be semen present on the sheets at least. She is going to have to prove the claims with evidence rather then him to prove innocence
Tyler Harris
Omg grossssss
cut2deep
This video is so irrelevant to his case.
Bryguyf69
@cut2deep wrote:
“This video is so irrelevant to his case.”
===
I agree but sort of disagree. It’s irrelevant to his defense — but it’s relevant to the landlord’s accusations. Her $30,000 suit is not so much for material damage but damage to her reputation and potential lost business. After all, it doesn’t cost $30,000 to buy new linen, steam clean the furniture or repaint the walls. Lucas’ posting of that pointless video has no purpose except to damage her reputation — which is exactly what she claims. That’s why it was stupid of him to post it. It will be especially damaging to him if she can prove that it’s not a “sex dungeon.” Then she’ll have a solid slander or libel suit that has nothing to do with proving semen stains, etc.
That said, going against her is the fact that it was her lawsuit that made all this public. I doubt that Lucas named her house in the credits, and it’s very unlikely that a potential renter would recognize it from the video. My guess is that most people don’t watch porn for the decor, and the eyes are focused on something else. So if I was Lucas’ attorney, I’d argue that the use of her property for porn is only publicly known because of her actions, not his.
Then Lucas should beg and/or pay her for the rights to 1) have used her property for commercial purposes, and 2) the right to include its likeness in his video. Otherwise, he would have wasted much more than $30,000 (rent, salaries for crew and 10 actors, food and possible equipment rental) for nothing. And if possible, promote the video using its notoriety (without bringing negative publicity to the landlord).
QJ201
Queerty, the only blog that gives duck face the time of day.
Hey easier to post a press release than create original content.
Kyle Jensen
Marcus Dunlea Camara
DarkZephyr
@Bryguyf69: While I agree that this video does nothing to disprove her belated allegations…that looks like a sex dungeon to me. The sex swing alone would be enough for me, but the trunk full of whips and chains kind of tears it. I am not sure where you would get the notion that sex dungeons don’t have comfortable couches for the masters and dominatrixes though.
@Cam: Based on what I recall from the previous article he always maintained that he had this footage and he never denied filming there at all. He merely denied leaving the mess that she described.
For the record, I am not the hugest Michael Lucas fan but I am also not a fan of those who try to extort money from gay men with claims that sound to ME designed to play against stereotypes about what gay men get up to when they have sex, so I continue to withhold judgment til more facts emerge.
Bryguyf69
Well, as I’ve said, I’ve never been to a sex dungeon nor seen one on video. Heck, it’s not something we studied in class, even on a graduate level. I still think that it can be simply a room to store props, and at worst, used to stage an s/m scene. I may be ignorant, but I don’t think smoke machines are a part of s/m. And again, I think she would have locked up a sex dungeon.
I’m also unsure as to why you call the allegations “belated.” Everything that we’ve heard is a reaction to her initial charges so they’re not new charges she made as a response to Lucas. If you mean that her charges weren’t leveled in the text msgs, she explained it by saying that it all started with seeing small stains and then enema kits/toys in drawers, etc. That caused her to bring out the UV light, which showed how extensive the “soiling” was. None of this may have been viewable at first glance. And certainly not with most walk-thrus, which generally check plumbing, refrigerators, furniture, etc. and not what she describes. Again, this is easy to prove if she kept the evidence — namely, used sex toys, enema tips, condoms, etc. DNA won’t lie. At the very least, she’ll depose the actors, who would probably have no reason to lie.
Bryguyf69
@DarkZephyr: I’m also unsure as to what you mean by gay stereotype since gays are stereotypically neat. She never accused him of having sex nor even having gay sex. Nor is there any stated condemnation for toys and enemas. She accused him of making a mess — and using her home for commercial purposes (which he will definitely lose). Those are hardly gay stereotypes. Nor are gays today stereotypically thought to use dildos, enemas, etc. Things have changed quite a bit since the 80’s, i.e. Cruising. Today’s gay stereotype are sensitive, stylish, intelligent, artsy, etc — thanks to MTV, Glee, As the World Turns, Days of Our Lives, Desperate Housewives, etc. Indeed, can you tell me one well-known media depiction of an enema/dildo-using gay character within the last 10 years? The only stereotypes used here is that of a messy pornographer and his porn actors.
semtex
@Cam: Exactly!
DarkZephyr
@Bryguyf69: she implied that he had messy sh*t laced sex which is most certainly a world wide stereotype about how gays have sex. Homophobes are making this claim about gay sex to THIS day, from the folks at ATLAH Church here in the USA to Uganda where LGBT people are mercilessly persecuted. Our *enemies* do NOT stereotype that we are “neat”, “sensitive” “stylish” and “intelligent”. They stereotype that we are depraved perverts who have messy sh** sex.
“Indeed, can you tell me one well-known media depiction of an enema/dildo-using gay character within the last 10 years?”
We haven’t been discussing “media depictions”. When I brought up the subject of stereotypes it was and still is about homophobic ones.
BTW, she wouldn’t have needed a special light to see the “brown tinged water” she claimed was there.
And even if she didn’t have a sex “dungeon” downstairs (which by what is seen in the video, it sure looks like she she did, smoke machines could be part of creating a fantasy)any fluids that she “found” all over the place could have come from anyone. If it, as you are suggesting, didn’t appear to the naked eye to be this big mess…how the hell does she even know it came from him and his people? How many people have used that place over the years?
I’m still not gonna judge for certain one way or the other til there are more facts. If it is DNA evidence, then great, though I would imagine that little DNA will be able to be lifted from the body fluid stains if they were invisible to the naked eye and required special light to see. Perhaps she can lift the DNA from the “brown tinted water” she says was in the hot tub.