Looksmaxxer Clavicular Begs Judge to Toss Rape Case

Looks maxing influencer Clvicular has. just asked the court to throw out his. criminal charges in Massachusetts, including rape. I'm going to break down. the motion as we see whether this is. going to work. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse. Weber. Okay, I want to follow up on something. that happened in the clvicular criminal. case. There was a major filing that I. want to do a legal breakdown of that is. looking at trying to throw away throw. out all of his criminal charges. Now, we.

know that Clvicular Braden Peters, 20. years old, he is this influencer. promotes looks maxing, right? The idea. of teaching, preaching on how to attain. peak levels of attractiveness. He's. facing though criminal charges out in. Massachusetts. He was arraigned in court. yesterday. counts of rape, administering. a substance or drugging someone for. sexual intercourse, and procuring. alcohol for a person under 21. Now, this. all seems to be in connection with. Alexandra Vasalevna Mendoza, an incident. that allegedly took place on May 23rd,

2025 at Peter's family home in Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Mendoza claims, and I say. Mendoza, even though she's a Jane Doe in. the criminal case, it mirrors exactly a. lawsuit that she had filed as well. We'll talk about it, but Mendoza seems. to claim that when she was 17, Peters. ordered her an Uber to his home. And. while they were at his home, he began. streaming on Twitch in his bedroom, had. allegedly asked Mendoza to lie about her. age, say she was 18. Mendoza then claims. Peters gave her enough alcohol that she. was quote really drunk, that she didn't.

want to consume it, but felt pressured. There's a claim, there's an allegation. that he kissed her while she was drunk. on the live stream, and that they had. sex after the stream was over. But at. some point the following morning, she. claims she woke up to him having sex. with her without her consent. And by the. way, there's the allegation that Peter's. mother and grandmother allegedly were in. the house, too. Now, Clvicular Peters. has denied the allegations through his. attorney. Yesterday, he pled not guilty. Yesterday, the court released him on.

$10,000 bail. He had to turn over his. passport. He was ordered to stay away. from his accuser. He was ordered not to. post about her on social media. He's due. back in court for a probable cause. hearing on November 24th. And we're. going to get more on that in a second. Probable cause. But as I mentioned, Mendoza also filed a lawsuit against. Clevicular 2. Now, her lawsuit, while. originally claiming sexual battery from. this alleged May 2025 incident, that. part of the lawsuit was dropped. Mendoza's lawyer, Drew Moss, told NBC,

"In light of Mr. Peter's recent post and. other conduct, this matter is more. appropriate for the criminal justice. system." And according to Moss, the. sexual assault claim was dropped, quote, due to the pending criminal charges in. Massachusetts. Miss Mendoza does not. want her civil case to interfere with. that process. We did a sidebar breaking. down that comment, what it meant. So, what's this lawsuit all about? Well, this lawsuit now is all about. allegations regarding a second purported. incident. And to be clear, none of these. criminal charges that he's currently.

facing are about this alleged second. incident that apparently happened six. months later in November of 2025 out in. Miami. But according to the lawsuit, and. it's important to know, Peters attempted. to kiss and seduce Mendoza, which he. claimed she rejected. And then Peters is. accused of going on this live stream on. the kick platform where he allegedly. told Mendoza that he wanted to inject. her cheeks with this nonFDA approved fat. dissolver. It's called Aqualix. And. according to Mendoza, Peters claimed he.

was qualified to give the injection. despite lacking medical authority. And. Mendoza apparently didn't provide legal. consent to receive it. And despite this, Mendoza claims that Peters did inject. her in both cheeks. Her right cheek was. perforated. Peters also allegedly stated. or suggested that meth had been added to. the injection mixture. And the lawsuit. also details comments allegedly made. during the live stream, including, "Bro, kick the minor off. If she's 17, you can. be banned." And there's another claim. Quote, "Before he injected Mendoza, the.

defendant reading the comments appearing. on the streaming session says, "She's. still a minor, you ped bleep." He then. responds, "I'm bleeping 19 years old. Are you guys actually that 17 and 19? Society's actually cooked. If you think. that's bad, he then proceeded to inject. the plainif. Now, this amended complaint. also alleges that after the first. injection, Mendoza appeared drugged on. camera, believed she was injected with. meth or another substance, which Peter. allegedly suggested again was added to. the mixture. This is again according to. the June filing, but I use that all as.

contacts background to now get into this. filing from Clavicular. Okay. So, as I. said, Clvicular's legal team filed a. motion to dismiss the criminal case. throughout the criminal charges. And I. want to break down what the arguments. are, whether it's going to work here, and either if it doesn't work here, if. it's a preview of what we could expect. at a criminal trial. So, it's important. to talk about it. So, the motion is. called Braden Peter's motion to dismiss. as a matter of law due to the. presentation of insufficient evidence.

Now, first thing he does is lay out. almost kind of a statement of facts. that kind of overlaps with how Mendoza. described their relationship. There's a. slightly different narrative to it, but. it reads, quote, "At the age of 16, the. complainant Jane Doe began her efforts. to establish popularity, fame, and. financial success as a social media. influencer. As part of her plan, Miss. Doe became known on social media as. redacted or redacted. In the spring of. 2025, Miss Doe contacted Mr. Peters, who. had amassed more than a million. followers on his looks maxing social.

media platform, which focuses on various. ways to improve and enhance physical. attractiveness. Misto's goal in. contacting Mr. Peters was to promote her. own social media presence and to obtain. her own financially rewarding social. media sponsorships using Mr. Peters as. her personal mentor and promoter. At the. time, Miss Doe was 17 years old. Mr. Peters was 19 years old. Over the course. of the next year, Miss Doe and Mr. Peters interacted professionally and. personally on a regular basis. Mr. Peters agreed to assist Miss Doe in.

creating her videos and composing the. corresponding scripts and to include her. videos in his own far-reaching social. media content. Mr. Peters also agreed to. compensate Miss Doe financially based. upon the resulting social media. interactions. With the encouragement and. support of Mr. Peters, Miss Doe's social. media presence took off. Now, so far. that seems to be relatively consistent. from what we saw in her complaint where. she talked about turning to social media. at 17, using the online names as Allora. or Allora Zea. She claimed Clvicular.

paid her $1,000 to film videos, how he. wanted her to become the female face of. Looks Maxing. There might be variations. in their accounts, but semicconsistent. Right now, according to her complaint, Peters allegedly helped her create. videos and even wrote scripts. So, while. there might be a little bit of. differences in the narratives, you see. it relatively consistent, at least for. here, let's go back to Clavvicular. Peter's motion. Okay. Quote, "By early. 2026, at the age of 17, Miss Doe had. signed a contract with an online trading.

platform that paid her $15,000 a month. as a social media promoter. Her strategy. in collaborating with Mr. Peters to. promote her own social media presence. and develop her own sponsorships had. literally paid off. Along the way, Miss. Doe voluntarily and intentionally. developed and maintained a personal. relationship with Mr. Peters. Now, I. want you to keep that in mind. specifically the $15,000 goes on. In. November 2025, some 6 months after the. alleged encounter giving rise to these. charges, so meaning of course the.

criminal charges, Miss Do informed her. social media followers that she and Mr. Peters quote did a little video stream. together where he injected Aqualix, a. fat dissolving and body contouring. solution. It was really fun. So that. goes on the idea of her credibility. here, right? We'll get into that. Quote, she described Mr. Peters to her. followers as super nice and shared that. he sent me an Uber right after. Now, this echoes what Clavvicular reportedly.

did after the allegations came out. He. went on social media and posted quote. trying to get my attention in any way. possible. A lawsuit. Seriously, really. petty of you. And he attached several. files to that post. The first was a clip. or seemingly a clip of Mendoza allegedly. saying just that about the injection. So, all of this to seemingly show. it. Is she only going after him now for. financial reasons? Goes to credibility.

We'll talk about it, but let's go back. to this motion. Okay. Quote, several. days later, Miss Doe privately messaged. Mr. Peters, asked him, "Are we running. the second round of Aqualixs in the. future?" and suggested, "Why don't we. just continue ascending together?" In. the same private messaging conversation, Miss Doe bluntly inquired of Mr. Peters. about his dream women and his end goal. for a relationship/wife. Following night, she messaged Mr. Peters. to pull up to a popular bar in downtown. Miami in order to meet up with her.

there. It goes on to say she began. negotiating with him for a share of the. revenue from his online coaching. business. Miss Doe also inquired about. working at a Florida nightclub in which. Mr. Peters had invested and was. promoting. Misto wrote Mr. Peters a. lengthy handwritten letter redacted copy. of which is attached as exhibit A in. which she stated among other things. quote Braden you have my loyalty 100%. I. admire the man you are. Misto further. wrote to Mr. Peters that she had quote. gained a lot of respect towards you for. staying loyal to your grind and being a. man. I want to stay on this grind and.

grow with you. Miss Doe thanked Mr. Peters for providing some income for me. and a place because genuinely I've. always wanted a stable place and you're. providing that. She offered to give Mr. Peters a back massage, a spa day, and to. chef up a macro good meal. Mto ended the. letter by writing thank you Braden. drawing a heart by his name and her. signature and assuring Mr. Peters that. she was always down for a hug and also. quote I love hugs. Now we've heard about. this letter before through clvicular and. if you go to the end of this motion.

there is in fact an attached letter. Now. we don't know for sure if it's from her. but this is her allegation but again if. true you could see how problematic that. would be for an accuser. Now the other. way of looking at it and again we've. talked about this in other cases like. the Cornell 7. Could someone be a victim. and still have an attachment to their. abuser? Still say these kinds of things? But again, the motion highlights. something else. Quote, later that same. month, December 2025, Misto privately.

messaged Mr. Peters, "I want you, NGL. Not going to lie." Her message to Mr. Peters continued, "I'm tired of being. like independent. I mean, I like it, but. I just need a man to relax with." Mto. suggested to Mr. Peters that we could. keep everything private, too, like no. social media. And that apparent. conversation is attached as an exhibit. as well uh in this motion at the end. Now this part of the motion is Kate. Quote, "By early 2026, however, Mr. Peter's professional career was evolving. and Miss Doe's view of their personal. relationship was beginning to change. At.

the same time, Miss Doe's sponsorship. income from her social media activities. had started to decrease, and Mr. Peters. was no longer available or interested in. promoting and supporting her social. media platform or her personal online. presence. As of March 1st, 2026, Miss. Doe's $15,000 a month social media. sponsorship had been cut in half. On. April 1st, 2026, the sponsorship was. terminated. Now, that is different than. what she claimed in her lawsuit because. she claimed she was losing that. sponsorship because it was his fault,

Peter's fault, because Mendoza alleged. that Peters began a campaign to. discredit her, which she claims led to. lost sponsorships, meaning the $15,000. per month deal. So part of me wonders if. this goes to trial, right? You know, they're both going to give their. narrative about what happened. You know, one way to think about it is does he. say, "Look, I didn't want to invest. anymore, X, Y, or Z reasons. Does she. characterize that as a campaign to. discredit her?" Interesting way of. looking at it. Let me say this for. anybody who owns a business, manages a.

business, runs a business. You don't. mean to tell you that running a business. is tough enough. The question I have is. why make things harder doing things. manually or relying on dozens of apps. that don't really talk to each other, right? That's where our sponsor ODU. comes in. Because ODU is an all-in-one. business management platform with a full. suite of integrated apps that seamlessly. connect all your operations from sales. and accounting to manufacturing, even. shipping. ODU can automatically generate. professional, sleek looking sales. orders, invoices, vendor bills. It can. automatically assign sales teams. It can.

send email updates through each sales. stage and even use AI to pull reports. that help with your decision-making. for. manufacturing. Their apps can sync. inventory with real-time production and. purchase updates so you never run out of. stock. When it comes time for. accounting, that's also fully automated. ODU can create invoices, track expenses, and even summarize data with AI to save. you hundreds of hours. You know what the. best part is? You can choose your apps. and even build custom workflows. So, it's all fully tailored to your. business's needs. Take your business to.

the next level by consulting with an ODO. expert today for free at. odo.comssidebar. Let's go back to the motion. So, his. motion goes on to say how she filed her. original lawsuit. Then it says how in. June of 2026, she and one of her. attorneys go to the Chattam, Massachusetts Police Department to file. a police report regarding this alleged. sexual incident in May of 2025. and then. clvicular Braden Peters alleges in this. motion, quote, Misto stated that on one.

occasion in May 2025, some 13 months. previously, she had consumed alcohol and. engaged in non-consensual sex with Mr. Peters at his grandmother's home in. Chadam. As Miss Do talked, her attorneys. displayed select segments of certain. social media content contained on his. personal cell phone to the officers and. provided them with various information. about Mr. Peters. When asked by the. officers whether she had sought out or. otherwise undergone a sexual assault. forensic examination, Miss Doe indicated. that she had not. When asked by the.

officers to whom she had first spoken. about the alleged non-consensual sexual. encounter, Miss Doe indicated to them. that she had told a friend who she. identified by name. When asked by the. officers for a friend's telephone number. so that they could interview the friend. as a potential corroborating first. complaint witness, Miss Doe told the. officers that she was unable to provide. them with the phone number because her. friend had changed cell phones. When the. officers later followed up with Miss Doe. in an effort to again obtain her. friend's contact information, Miss Doe.

changed her story altogether and. acknowledged to the officers that in. fact she had never told her friend or. told anyone about the events that she. was now alleging had occurred with Mr. Peters in May 2025. As of last month, September 2026, Miss Doe's position. under oath was that the only individuals. with whom she has discussed the alleged. events of May 2025 are her civil. attorneys, the Chattam Police, and. quote, "My boyfriend." Now, how is he. claiming all this? Well, there appears. to be a police report attached to the. motion. This is from what appears to be.

the officer's report. Quote, I asked. Redacted who was the first person she. told about this incident, to which she. stated that she kept it to herself for a. while. She eventually told a friend. named Redacted, but she did not have her. phone number at the time due to changing. to a new phone to provide it to me. I. advised that once she obtains the phone. number, then she could provide it. Later. in the investigation, I contacted. Redacted to obtain the phone number and. contact Redacted as the first. complaintant witness, but Redacted. advised that she did not specifically. tell Redacted or anyone what occurred.

with Mr. Peters. Redacted did not. provide me with a phone number for. Redacted as she stated that she did not. inform her of everything that occurred. in Chadam with Mr. Peters. She. reiterated that she did not tell anyone. the full extent of what occurred. Obviously, this is a credibility issue. Changing stories are always a. credibility issue. But of course, the. counterargument is not every alleged. victim of assault is going to go out and. tell everyone or always report what.

happened to them. It can get. complicated. It can also get complicated. with how they relay that information. So, there's always a lot of factors to. consider, but again, we are talking. about a criminal case. We're talking. about a prosecution trying to prove. guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Is this. an issue for them? Motion goes on. Less. than two weeks after leaving the Chattam. Police Station, Miss Doe and her. attorney filed an amended complaint in. the pending civil lawsuit in Florida. against Mr. Peters. The amended. complaint included a new civil claim and. sought substantial money damages and.

financial compensation from Mr. Peters. based upon new allegations that Miss Doe. and her attorney had just made to the. Chattam police regarding an alleged. non-consensual sexual encounter with Mr. Peters in Chattam Massachusetts in May. 2025. Other than contacting Miss Doe in. an unsuccessful attempt to obtain. contact information for her friend, there is no indication that any. additional investigative steps or. actions were undertaken by the police in. June, July, or the better part of August. 2026. In late August 2026, the assigned.

officer obtained Uber records confirming. that Miss Doe had traveled to Mr. Peter's residence in Chadam on a date in. May 2025. On two occasions in late 2026, the officer attempted to contact Mr. repeaters by phone, but his automated. voicemail box was full and the officer. was unable to leave a message for him. On or about September 3rd, 2026, the. assigned officer updated her narrative. report by noting her personal belief. that Miss Doe had not consented to the. alleged sexual encounter with Mr. Peters. in May 2025. The officer reasoned that.

given Miss Doe's level of intoxication. and the fact that Miss Doe was a minor. under the age of 21, she Miss Doe had. lacked the ability to consent. Accordingly, as she expressed in her. report, the officer believed that. probable cause existed to support. criminal charges. And that seems to be. true because that's how it's described. in the police report. But it also goes. directly to the argument. The next. section of this motion says, "A finding. of probable cause must be based on. reasonably trustworthy information.

sufficient to warrant a reasonably. prudent person in believing that a crime. was committed." So, the motion describes. what exactly is the law and probable. cause. What's the standard? What's the. standard to arrest? What do you need to. show? The motion says, quote, as the. Supreme Judicial Court has repeatedly. stated, to establish probable cause, meaning to support the charges, the. evidence presented in support of the. proposed charge must consist of. reasonably trustworthy information. sufficient to warrant a reasonable or. prudent person in believing that the.

defendant has committed an offense. Similarly, the court has explained that. probable cause exists where the facts. and circumstances within the knowledge. of police are enough to warrant a. prudent person in believing that the. individual has committed or was. committing an offense. A demonstration. of probable cause requires more than. mere suspicion, but something less than. evidence sufficient to warrant a. conviction, meaning proof beyond a. reasonable doubt. So, more of a middle. ground here, right? Lower standard of. proof, but it can't just be anything. Next section says, "A finding of.

probable cause that the alleged victim. lacked the ability to consent must be. supported by reasonably trustworthy. information that the alleged victim was. so impaired that she was incapable of. consenting." So, this section of the. motion cites Massachusetts law specific. statute that states, quote, "Whoever has. sexual intercourse with a person and. compels such person to submit by force. and against his will or compel such. person to submit by threat of bodily. injury shall be punished." To prove a. defendant guilty of rape, the. Commonwealth must prove three elements. beyond the reasonable doubt. One, the.

defendant engaged in sexual intercourse. with the alleged victim. Two, the. defendant used force or the threat of. force or bodily injury, actual or. implied to engage in sexual intercourse. And three, the sexual intercourse was. against the alleged victim's will, that. is without her consent. Quote, significantly, the defendant has. no burden to prove that the alleged. victim did consent. The Commonwealth has. the burden to prove beyond a reasonable. doubt that the alleged victim did not. consent. So how does that apply here? The motion states, quote, with respect.

to the third element of the offense that. the alleged victim did not consent, here. the Chattam police officer stated that. in her report that it was her, the. officer's belief that Miss Doe had quote. lacked the ability to consent. As. reflected in the narrative report that. the officer submitted to the clerk. magistrate in support of the application. for a criminal complaint, the officer. reasoned that given Miss Doe's quote. level of intoxication and the fact that. Miss Doe was quote a minor under the age. of 21, she Miss Doe had quote lacked the. ability to consent to the alleged sexual. encounter with Mr. Peters in May of.

2025. If a person is unable to consent. to sexual intercourse because of the. consumption of alcohol or drugs or for. some other reason and defendant knows or. reasonably should have known that then. any resulting intercourse is without the. person's consent. If because of the. consumption of alcohol or drugs or for. some other reason for example sleep, unconsciousness, intellectual disability. or helplessness, a person is so impaired. as to be unable or incapable of. consenting to sexual intercourse. then. the intercourse that occurs while the. person is incapable of consenting is not.

consensual. Makes sense, right? Something to note. So, aside from. Mendoza's account, right, what Mendoza. told police, the officer also took into. consideration the following potential. evidence. So, Mr. Schwarz, Mendoza's. attorney, quote, showed clips of the. Twitch stream from the incident on his. phone. The clips were taken directly. from Mr. Peter's Twitch account, which. is King Clavicular. In the clips, it. shows Mr. Peters and Redacted sitting in. two chairs. Mr. Peters is shirtless in.

some of the clips and then wearing a. white collared shirt in others. In one. clip, Mr. Peters asked Redacted, "Don't. you you get red too when you drink or. no?" Redacted then asked Mr. Peters if. her face appeared red. To which he. stated, "A little bit." Both of their. cheeks appeared flushed in this clip. In. another clip, Mr. Peters was shirtless. and stated, "Wait, I'm so drunk though.". before she and Mr. Peters kissed on the. lips. So that is what also seemingly led. the officer to believe that she was. intoxicated. But I want to go back to.

Clevicular's motion. Quote, "The. reasonably trustworthy information. submitted to the clerk magistrate was. insufficient to warrant a reasonably. prudent person in believing that Misto. was incapable of consenting." Quote. here, the complaint application. consisted of the three-page narrative. police report and the two one-page. supplemental police reports. The. information provided by the Chattam. police to the clerk magistrate in those. reports on the required element of lack. of consent was insufficient to establish. probable cause. The meeting with Miss. Doe and her attorney took place on June.

4th, 2026. The narrative report of the. meeting that was submitted to the clerk. magistrate on September 4th, 2026 was. first entered into the Chattam Police. computer system on August 31st, 2026, modified on September 3rd, 2026, and. approved on September 4th, 2026. Among. other things, it is unclear from the. report what was said by the officers, what was said by Miss Doe, what was said. by her attorney, what was shown to the. officers by M. Doe's attorney on his. cell phone, whether either of the.

officers were taking notes, or how long. the meeting lasted. Given that the. meeting occurred on June 4th, 2026, it. is equally unclear how the narrative. report first entered on August 31st, 2026, modified on September 3rd, approved on September 4th, was drafted. In short, as a matter of law, within the. four corners of the complaint. application, the information provided by. the Chattam Police to the clerk. magistrate in support of the element of. lack of consent was insufficient to. establish probable cause. Put another. way, with respect to the theory of proof. relied upon here by the Chattam police.

to establish probable cause to charge. Mr. Peters that the alleged victim. lacked the ability to consent. It is not. enough to establish probable cause that. MO was intoxicated or under the. influence of alcohol or drugs to some. degree. Rather, to establish probable. cause that Miss Doe was incapable of. consenting to intercourse, the police. must provide the clerk magistrate with. sufficient information, not just to. establish probable cause to believe that. Miss Doe was intoxicated, but probable. cause to believe that her degree of. intoxication was so extreme that it.

rendered her unable to consent. This. part's important here. There is not. sufficient reasonably trustworthy. information in the officer's three-page. report from which a reasonable and. prudent person could conclude that Miss. Doe was intoxicated, never mind so. incapacitated that she was incapable of. consenting, that her degree of. intoxication was so extreme that it. rendered her unable to consent. The only. information contained in the officer's. narrative report regarding the amount of. alcohol that Miss Doe allegedly consumed. comes from two sentences, one of which.

states, "Miss Do stated that Mr. Peters. offered her alcohol a second time, which. she declined because it was too much. already. The second of which states, "I. asked Miss Doe how much alcohol she. consumed, to which she stated that she. likely had two, three shots, but it was. not really like shots. It was more like. cups." In fact, throughout her narrative. report, the officer's description of. Miss Doe's account of the alleged. sequence of events, communications, and. interactions with Mr. Peter suggests. that Miss Doe's alleged degree of. intoxication was anything but so extreme. that it rendered her so incapacitated.

that she was unable to consent. So. that's an interesting argument, right? Is there really enough here to support. the claims? Is it too much a reliance on. this narrative? What more do you have? Was she really so intoxicated that she. couldn't consent? And the idea there, all the details that she's providing. seems to suggest she remembered a lot. No, that's an argument. That's an. argument. So what do I imagine a court. would do here? This is just my opinion. This to me a court would say has met the. burden at this initial stage that you.

can support criminal charges at this. point at this stage probable cause with. the statements of an accuser alone. And. if you couple that with the video from. the Twitch stream that may be enough. that may be enough for this case to go. to a try or fact to sort all those. issues out. Those are real issues that. he brought up about credibility, about. the actual report, whether anything was. modified, changed, what information. there was to support 100%. And to be. clear, even though there might be enough.

to go to a trial, again, I could be. wrong, but that's the way I see it. That. doesn't mean that a jury or a judge. would ultimately agree that this is. proof beyond a reasonable doubt of rape. Now, if she really is a minor and is. drinking and he's providing alcohol, that could complicate the charges when. it comes to drugging someone or. providing something to someone for. sexual intercourse and procuring liquor. for someone under 21 years old. And I. think the argument would go with respect. to those charges that there's enough. right there to proceed on those as well. But again, that's just my take. That's.

what I think the court's going to do. One more thing I got to call out before. we wrap things up. So, it's called. Braden Peters memo in support of release. on fair and reasonable bail and. appropriate conditions. Now, it's kind. of moot to talk about this because, yeah, bail was already set at $10,000. There's been a number of conditions that. were put in place. I mentioned them. before, but there is a part about this. this document, this filing, how they. characterize Braden Peters that I think. it's worth noting, and you can see this. potentially repeated elements of it, let's say, in an opening statement.

Quote, simply stated, Braden Peters is. neither a danger to the community nor a. risk of flight. Mr. Peters is 20 years. old. He graduated from high school two. years ago. He stands before the court. today in response to a summon and. traveled to Massachusetts from the state. of California to answer the charges. He. currently resides in Miami, Florida, and. Los Angeles, California. He has no prior. record of felony criminal convictions or. court defaults. He is engaged counsel. has every intention of appearing before. this court and taking an active role. with his attorney in vigorously. defending against the charges. Mr. Peter's family, including his mother and.

grandparents, has several generations of. roots in the Cape Cod and New England. community. So basically, he's not a. flight risk. he's not a danger. This is. why you should get bail." Now, you. couple all that with a statement uh to. USA Today. This is from his attorney, David Mayor, came out yesterday saying. his client categorically denies these. allegations. In May of 2025, Mr. Peters. was 19 years old. The complainant was 17. years old, and they were involved in a. professional and personal relationship. that continued for another year. Continues, "At no time did the. complainant report anything to the.

police or to anyone because there was. nothing to report." The fact that these. allegations first arose in June 2026. when the complainant and her Florida. attorney appeared together at the. Chattam Police Department just days. before filing an amended civil lawsuit. seeking thousands of dollars from Mr. Peters speaks for itself. So there you. go. Talk about this again. Thanks so. much for joining us here on Sidebar. I'm. Jesse Weber. We'll speak to you next. time.