I admit, I haven’t been keeping up much with the Kayden Kross legal story simply because, well … there is so much bullshit with all the versions of the stories, it got to complicated to try and keep up with. It’s more out there than a fucking soap opera. Darrah Ford however has been on the ball and recently found out that the Kayden Kross case wasn’t dropped as suggested by Mike South that instead her case was granted a continuance until March 24, 2009.
photo from ClubKayden.com
For those of you who don’t recall, Kayden Kross was arrested awhile ago for pulling a housing scam that wasn’t really revealed until the housing crisis was in full bloom. It was a bad enough crime on its own but coupled with the fact entire economic problems for the world were being blamed on the housing problems, only made the Kayden Kross story even all that more interesting.
So exactly what does Kayden Kross stand accused of doing? Well basically a man, who was a veteran mind you, came home from serving his country, got a job, had some sort of incident where he became disabled and couldn’t work. As a result he got behind on his mortgage and the bank was going to foreclose and his family of 4 were to be out on the street.
Kayden Kross stepped in and offered to buy them home temporarily and let the man live there and pay her rent. Some stated there was also a buyback clause in their rental agreement which stated that within a few years (2, 3, 5 — depending on whatever version of the story you were reading) the man could pay back the loan Kayden Kross paid to save his house and buy back his house with no additional penalties. Now keep in mind this part of the story is also highly debated. They don’t debate the fact that Kayden did anything here, just the status of the man. The man is being called a disabled vet, a term often given to men who are wounded during a time of active duty. However this man is someone who got hurt on the job, and also happens to be a vet so he is a vet who was temporarily disabled and unable to work through a on the job injury so some, including myself have a problem labeling him as a disabled veteran. I get that this guy got a raw fucking deal but to imply he is something he isn’t for the sole purpose of garnering sympathy and more anger and hate toward Kayden Kross is equally as wrong, well not equally as wrong as what she did but it is wrong nonetheless. You can’t stand on your high horse all while committing fraud or perpetuating a deception.
Anyway back to the story — according to the stories going around, the man paid Kayden Kross rent month after month after month only she never paid the mortgage with it. Instead she took the money and ran. The feds later caught up with her and Kayden Kross not only admits to it but says it wasn’t her fault, she was a victim in this scam as well that she’s a poor innocent girl who doesn’t know better because apparently the girl who claims to be the smartest chick in porn, somehow is now a poor innocent blonde. In addition to all of the other rumors there is a doozie that suggests the original investigation was tainted by the fact that Kayden Kross had sexual relations with the investigating officer.
I told you this story was better than a soap opera! Well the time has come for Kayden Kross to pay the piper and all those in her camp were saying that Kayden Kross would have all charges dropped, blah blah but turns out now that isn’t the case. Instead the case was granted a continuance and we will have to wait until the end of March to see this one play out.
What astounds me is little fact there is in any of that I heve never said charges were dropped. I said they will be dropped and I still expect that to be the case.
As for The last 3 or so paragraphs there is so much incorrect information in there that it doesn’t even begin to resemble the truth.
Let us step back a moment, the only reason this is a “Soap Opera” is because people like Darrah and Gene Ross and Scott Fayner keep reporting made up facts and accounts that are based on what other people reading into it. Kayden nor myself has made any official statement except an interview with AVN where she said she couldn’t comment on the case, and that is still the case. When the truth comes out about the so called disabled vet who lost his home and the rest of the bullshit most people will see it for what it is. Some people may well suffer consequences.
But it would be an extraordinarily poor strategy to splash everything in the porn press, This is far more important than satisfying the ego of a degenerate like Gene Ross or a moron and wannabe like Darrah, this isn’t the Jerry Springer Show or something that can be adjudicated on The Peoples Court.
There’s a reason I am behind Kayden 100%, it is because it is the right thing to do and if you knew what I know, and eventually you will, you would understand this.
There is so much garbage floating around the internet about this case that I feel motivated to make some corrections. I am not a lawyer and I am not personally acquainted with any of the principals in the case. I certainly do not have any knowledge of the circumstances beyond what is reported on the internet. I am a true civilian, acomplete outsider both to this case and to the adult industry. However, even by my layman’s knowledge of the law and court procedures I can see a lot that is simply wrong. If my comments contain any errors, I am sure they will be quickly corrected by other bloggers.
First, there is no conflict between dismissal and continuance. Simply because proceedings have been continued, we should not conclude that the case will not be dismissed. Any case that is not immediately resolved between the parties (in this case one party is the State of California) follows a recognizable pattern. After the defendant’s plea has been entered the attorneys usually file preliminary motions. Almost certainly the defense filed one or more motions to dismiss. In a civil case the plaintiff also usually files one or more motions for summary judgment. Once the preliminary motions are filed, the opposing attorney is given the opportunity to file a response. After all the motions and responses are filed the judge can rule on the motions. Because this process takes time, continuances are granted in normal proceedings to give the attorneys time to prepare written responses and to plan for oral arguments. Continuances may also be granted because of unforeseen scheduling conflicts, illnesses etc. The point is that just because a continuance appears in the court record, this does not mean that the complaint will not be dismissed. However, there are other reasons to doubt whether the complaint against Kayden will be dismissed at this stage. A motion to dismiss must be based on some error in legal procedure on the part of the prosecutor. It is not based on the merits of the case concerning which at this stage the judge is in no position to make any decisions since he or she has not heard the evidence. The likelihood of procedural error on the part of the District Attorney’s office is very low. Prosecuting crimes is what they do and they almost never make procedural mistakes. Investigative errors such as violation of Miranda rights are grounds for appeal; they are not the stuff of preliminary motions. Dismissals are most effective in civil cases where lawyers often make mistakes (However, even in the case of a dismissal, the plaintiff’s attorney is given the opportunity to revise the complaint).
Similarly a motion for summary judgment, if indeed that is part of the criminal procedure (which I am not sure), is unlikely to be granted. Unless the defendant pleads guilty, she is entitled to a trial and examination of the evidence against her.
I am simply reading the tea leaves based on the scanty court record that is publicly available, but I believe there are good reasons to conclude that a swift resolution of the case is seems less likely as the proceedings continue. Charges are usually only dropped with the agreement of the prosecutor who can do so for several reasons. But this doesn’t often happen. The time to convince the prosecutor that you are innocent is before he or she files the complaint. Once you are charged the prosecutor believes you are guilty or at least that a winnable case can be presented against you. And the judge will give the prosecutor the benefit of the doubt.
So an outright dismissal is tough to achieve after you are charged. In the preliminary proceedings the defense and the prosecution also often enter into negotiations for a reduced sentence. The prosecutor usually wants a guilty or no contest plea in exchange for agreeing to a reduced sentence. So if the defendant believes she is not guilty, an early plea bargain will not materialize. The length of the proceedings lead me to believe we are beyond the initial plea bargain stage. Again there is nothing sinister in this since defendants in felony cases typically plead guilty at the beginning of a proceeding only if there is overwhelming evidence against them.
After the preliminary motions are disposed of the discovery phase of the trial begins. The defendant has the right with her attorney to examine the evidence against her. This is the most time consuming phase. Witnesses must be deposed and documents examined. In white collar cases the documentation can be extensive and complex. It is during discovery that a number of cases are won or lost. A picture begins to emerge and the attorney for the defense concludes either that the accusation is not provable beyond a reasonable doubt or that the defendant should cut her losses and bargain for the best deal possible. Reasonable doubt is a very high standard and that is the reason why so many cases go to trial. However, at trial the prosecution’s attitudes harden. Now he or she will ask for the maximum possible penalty if the defendant is found guilty.
So, although a dismissal at this date is still technically possible, it is unlikely. Also if a simple plea bargain were in the works, the proceedings probably would not have dragged on this long.
Secondly, it is possible but most unlikely that the FBI was involved at any stage of the investigation. This is a prosecution by the State of California for violation of the California penal code. Any involvement by federal agencies would have had to have something to do with the mortgages and the potential for violation of federal banking laws. While possible, the case is simply much too small to involve federal law enforcement.
Thirdly, the rumor of sexual involvement between Kayden and an investigator, while possible as well, is probably unfounded because any such involvement would have had repercussions. The investigator would have been subjected to disciplinary actions and another – very serious – count of obstruction of justice would have been added to the complaint.
Having cleared away a few of the internet rumors, I must confess that I find this prosecution puzzling. In most jurisdictions this sort of mortgage fraud would not have been criminally prosecuted at all, even if violation of a criminal statute were at issue. It is very difficult to prove criminal intent beyond a reasonable doubt. The offended party would have a much greater chance of winning and obtaining restitution through a civil trial where the standard is preponderance of the evidence and where the fact of fraud can often sway a jury even where a clear intent to defraud has not been proved. Indeed this sort of purchase/rental arrangement happens frequently to “save” distressed mortgage holders. If properly structured and (in the case of California) with full disclosure, they are perfectly legal. The structuring of the deal leads to another question. A real estate sale is not an unvetted transaction. Attorneys must sign off on the legality of the deed of sale. When the change of title is recorded, encumbrances such as the understanding between Kayden and the complaining witness should come to light. The fact that no mention is made of the attorneys who signed off on these transactions may just be due to sloppy internet reporting. But it is hard to see how at least one attorney is not a co-defendant or at least a person of interest.
The District Attorney may have been motivated in this case by the indigence of the complaining witness and the current atmosphere surrounding the mortgage and real estate crises. Or the violation of the real estate disclosure statute may be a provable stand-in for some more gross fraud which he feels he cannot prove. It is also possible that the prosecution may be selective, motivated by Kayden’s profession as an adult performer. Unfortunately, even if true, that is not a defense. The fact that other people did the same thing and escaped is not a reason you should not be prosecuted.
Moreover, it is puzzling that Kayden, the initial purchaser of the property, should be one of the defendants. Typically fraud in these arrangements is perpetrated by an unscrupulous mortgage broker who earns a commission each time the property is flipped. The purchaser, an individual with good credit who is often solicited on Craig’s List or some other type of advertisement, is just as much a victim as the seller. To this extent there may be merit to the dumb blonde defense, since there is precedent for mortgage brokers victimizing both parties. But the fact that Kayden is included as a defendant is not a good sign. It seems to indicate that the prosecutor has evidence of her collusion with the other perpetrators of the fraud that is not yet public knowledge. Kayden’s co-defendant is, as I understand it, the mortgage broker who arranged the second sale. His defense that he was victimized by Kayden is less convincing simply because the mortgage broker is the maestro who organizes the entire transaction. It is hard to see how fraud, such as lack of proper disclosure to the initial seller, could occur without his knowledge.
And that in the end is what should most disturb Kayden. The general public does not know what actually occurred, and only she knows what passed through her mind. She will learn in discovery whether the prosecutor has some evidence that will enable him to prove her guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
If Kayden loses the case or negotiates a plea before a decision is handed down she is unlikely to face a prison term. Most likely she would have to pay a fine and provide some sort of restitution to the complaining witness. If the figures mentioned on the internet are believable, she could be liable for a substantial amount. If Kayden decides to fight and wins, she must still face significant negative consequences. No defendant ever really “wins” a criminal case. In the first place, she would have a pretty large legal bill which she would have to pay whether she wins or loses. Secondly she would have the felony on her record if she were convicted, a definite negative in the job market. Interestingly enough even felony convictions sometimes have a way of getting swept under the carpet if the state ultimately feels they didn’t have much merit. Unfortunately the internet publicity has trashed that possibility. And even if she wins, “accused felon” is just as bad in some people’s minds.
In fact this entire matter has been a public relations disaster for Kayden. I am somewhat taken aback by the firestorm of negative reaction that appears to be coming from within the adult industry. That community is more notable for supporting their own since so many adult performers are in fact subject to selective prosecution and harassment. The condemnation of Kayden by her peers, whether or not it originates with a few individuals and whether or not it has something to do with personal relations, cannot be good. One would have expected that most tolerant of communities to have shown support or at least withheld judgment.
It is a wise move, mandated I assume by her lawyer, not to comment on the case. All felony cases are serious matters even though the standards for felony theft are low. Letting a publicist speak for her is in principle OK since she can dissociate herself from his statements. But the way her publicist has gone about his job is doing her more harm than good. His degrading tone and veiled threats against her internet critics reflects most poorly on him and by extension on her. Also your lawyer tells you not to make public comments on a case for a reason. The prosecutor can use anything you say against you. In this light comments like “…if you knew what I know…” on the part of her publicist are not wise. The prosecutor could easily use that comment as a justification for deposing him. The question is obvious: “Just what exactly do you know about this case that the rest of us don’t?” At the very least he gets dragged into an affair that he originally had nothing to do with. And, if his testimony were to contradict hers, even inadvertently, he could be partially responsible for her conviction. He needs to submit all his online comments to Kayden’s lawyer for approval first before he publishes them. They may end up being less colorful, but at least he won’t do her any damage.
On the subject of lawyers, Kayden’s choice of counsel is the single most important decision she can make in this situation. I know nothing about the lawyer she has chosen. But I trust she took care to choose someone who has experience in real estate and banking crime. The jack of all trades who signs off on home sales will not do. Nor will the guy who defends you in traffic court. You need a criminal defense attorney with experience on white collar crime and an intimate knowledge of California real estate law.
I sympathize with Kayden as I do with all adult performers and exotic dancers. Their enthusiasm about their sexuality is something to be admired and not disdained. At the same time they are very young girls who are thrown into a mature economic environment with little or no preparation. Strippers are taught a perfunctory and mechanical sort of salesmanship that focuses on quick money. The studio system introduces them to a world of contract signing and deal making which they may not fully understand. And since the major studios often treat their contract girls with a great deal of integrity and even indulgence, some performers may come to believe that everyone will treat them in the same way. Moreover, as with nearly every sector of the entertainment business, the adult industry must make do with a subculture of petty crooks. Combine this with the injustice the girls must feel at the perceived immorality of their chosen profession and one wonders how in any way they can maintain a real distinction between proper and improper behavior, between right and wrong. The poet who said it’s not easy to be nineteen years old wasn’t thinking of mortgage fraud.