Tom Sandoval blames Raquel Leviss' 'carelessness' for revenge porn controversy

Tom Sandoval argued that Leviss failed to mitigate her damages and voluntarily exposed herself to the alleged harm.


Pop Culture & Art July 19, 2024
Courtesy: Reuters, AFP

Tom Sandoval claimed Raquel Leviss' careless behavior led to her revenge porn lawsuit, alleging she was fully aware of the consequences of her actions during their affair.

According to documents obtained by People on Thursday, Sandoval stated that the sexually explicit videos Leviss accused her “Vanderpump Rules” co-star of taking without her consent were due to her own carelessness and negligence.

Sandoval’s legal team argued that Leviss' claims of being a “victim of the predatory and dishonest behavior of an older man” was a result of her “negligence, breach, and fault.”

Leviss, 29, admitted her role in Sandoval, 41, cheating on his girlfriend of nine years, Ariana Madix, but wasn't prepared for the chaos that followed, leading to her admission into a mental health facility, according to her complaint filed in February.

In his response, Sandoval argued that Leviss failed to mitigate her damages and voluntarily exposed herself to the alleged harm.

Sandoval’s team also requested that Leviss be barred from receiving damages due to the doctrine of unclean hands, claiming she did not act reasonably and in good faith.

The filing also argued that Leviss’ status as a public figure should nullify her right to privacy, as the public has a legitimate interest in their lives.

Representatives for Leviss were not immediately available for comment to Page Six.

Leviss’ lawsuit claimed that Madix, 39, discovered her affair with Sandoval after finding a video of the “Rachel Goes Rogue” podcast host in a state of undress and masturbating on his phone.

Leviss also alleged in the complaint that Sandoval possesses additional illicit videos or photographs of her.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ