Your daily adult tube feed all in one place!
The billionaire heir to a Coca-Cola bottling fortune Alki David has been spotted for the first time since an LA jury ordered him to pay $900million to a former staffer in a landmark sexual assault case.
The media mogul, 56, was seen visiting an Apple Store in a grey tracksuit while walking his dog in west London.
Ten days ago, Alki, also known as Alkiviades, was ordered to pay the enormous sum by a Los Angeles jury after he was accused of raping an employee listed as a Jane Doe in court documents.
The sum is nearly one fourth of his total net worth, and is thought to be the largest sexual damages award in history.
David was accused of inflicting 'severe sexual harassment and assault, including rape' to a former staffer, referred to in court as Jane Doe, from February 2016 to April 2019.
Billionaire Alki David, 56, was spotted for the first time, in west London, since he was ordered to pay $900million to an unnamed former staffer in a sexual assault case
The billionaire was seen visiting an Apple Store and walking his dog after he was accused of raping an employee listed as a Jane Doe in court documents
David (pictured with ex-wife Jennifer Stano in 2011) is the heir to a international Coca-Cola bottling empire and founder of Hologram USA
She had worked for several of David's companies including Filmon TV in Beverley Hills, Hologram USA - which has created 3D animated avatars of dead performers including Tupac and Michael Jackson, Swiss-X Labs, and others, where she subjected to sexual assault and harassment.
Soon after joining, a female colleague had warned Doe about the 'alarmingly hostile' workplace environment reporting that David had forcibly kissed her, the lawsuit claimed.
Weeks later the unnamed victim rebuffed his attempt to kiss her during a work trip to his private island in Greece, and found herself laid off shortly afterwards.
But in 2018 he was back in touch to offer her a job as brand ambassador for his cannabis manufacturing company, Swiss-X.
The suit claimed that after agreeing, he took her back to a hotel room where he persuaded her to sample the product before forcing her to touch his penis.
The following April she was called to a business meeting in a small room where he raped her in front of one of his Doberman pinschers.
Throughout proceedings, the court heard several shocking claims about the businessman including the use of a pornographic image that was captioned 'HER-ASS' on his company's HR department's door.
His behavior was allegedly so prolific that his office became chillingly referred to as the 'rape room' among staff.
His company owns the Hologram USA Theatre on Hollywood Boulevard where its 3D avatars of dead performers including Michael Jackson and Tupac are animated for a paying audience
Former production assistant Mahim Khan (pictured right with lawyer Gloria Allred) warned him against 'violating' another woman when she was awarded $58 million in 2019
Staffer Lauren Reeves was awarded $5 million for assault in a case against David that brought up the first mention of his corporate 'rape room'
David was accused of inflicting 'severe sexual harassment and assault, including rape' on the former model, referred to in court as Jane Doe, from February 2016 to April 2019
The prosecuting lawyer Gary Dordick said: 'This monumental verdict marks a significant triumph for justice and sets a precedent in the fight against workplace sexual assault.'
Before the $900million order, the Cypriot-British businessman had already lost a staggering $80million in a series of judgements for sexual assaults dating back to 2014.
Two cases against the billionaire in 2016 were settled out of court but he was ordered to pay $5million to former staffer Lauren Reeves who claimed he put his hands on her throat and pushed her chair into a wall.
That case also featured references to the 'rape room' and her claim that he told her he needed to 'buy supplies' for it.
In April 2019, he was ordered to pay $8million in damages to a woman who was fired after refusing to sleep with David in a case that chillingly echoed that of Doe's.
Later that same year, the billionaire was ordered to pay the biggest sum to a victim to date when his former production assistant Mahim Khan was awarded $58million in her sexual battery case.
Lawyer Gary Dordick said Monday's 'monumental verdict marks a significant triumph for justice and sets a precedent in the fight against workplace sexual assault'
David went on a bizarre rant on Instagram last week, claiming that he was not ordered to pay $900 million to his sexual assault accuser. Dordick, the lawyer representing Jane Doe, told DailyMail.com that David's claims on social media are false and that there is '100% no question' he was ordered to pay for his actions
Khan claimed that David had thrust his pelvis into her face and simulated oral sex, rubbed her vagina, frequently grabbed her pelvic area, peppered her with unwanted kisses, given her a lap dance in front of a client, and put his hands under her dress to cup her breasts.
She testified that at times David would also pull his pants down, grab her by the neck and shove her into his crotch.
'I hope the punitive damages verdict sends a message to Alki David to never, ever think of violating another woman's body,' she said in a statement after the trial
David denied all claims against him in 2019 and said: 'I never touched any of these women.'
It comes after Alki recently went on a bizarre rant on social media, claiming there is no $900 million order against him and that 'all evidence shows that the alleged rape never happened'.
'These newspapers got it all wrong because these newspapers belong to a network of criminal d-----bags that employ the lawyers that wrote this fake order in the first place,' David said in one of many videos.
Gary Dordick, the lawyer representing Jane Doe, told the DailyMail.com that David's claims on social media are false and that there is '100% no question' he was ordered to pay for his actions.
A source also confirmed to the DailyMail.com that a verdict was reached on Monday in favor of the plaintiff.