Leah Bassett had spoken with the potential tenant several times over the phone, court documents say.
Joshua Spafford eventually agreed to rent Leah Bassett’s furnished home on Martha’s Vineyard from October 2014 to May 2015, according to a federal lawsuit filed this week against Spafford and several others, the Boston Globe reported.
Spafford, an adult film producer, allegedly forgot to mention what he intended to use the Aquinnah home for, The Associated Press reported.
In March 2015, Spafford told Bassett that he’d been fired and had left the home because he couldn’t afford the rent anymore, the Vineyard Gazette reported. Bassett then asked her parents, who lived nearby, to check on the home, the lawsuit said.
Finding the home in a “deplorable state of condition,” Bassett’s parents asked local police to inspect the residence, the newspaper reported.
Days later, Bassett’s mother found two people unpacking groceries in the kitchen, the lawsuit said. They learned that the adult film director who fired Spafford had taken over the lease, the Boston Globe said.
Bassett then made the “highly disturbing discovery” that her home had been used for the production of “graphic pornography” — more than 30 gay porn films over a seven-month period, reported The Martha’s Vineyard Times.
Directors used “nearly every room of her home” for their productions, including her dining room table, bedrooms, sofas and laundry room appliances, Bassett alleged, AP reported. Her furnishings and artwork could be seen in graphic videos and photographs posted online, the lawsuit said, according to the Globe.
Bassett says some of her decorative pillows and bed spreads were used, the Times reported.
Some of the adult film actors had bragged about their porn shoots at the “chic” island residence, according to the complaint.
The ordeal has left Bassett emotionally unable to rent out her home to anyone else, no matter how “well-vetted seemingly,” the lawsuit said, the Times reported.
Stephen Roach, an attorney for adult film production company Mile High Distribution Inc., a defendant in the case, told The Globe the matter stems from a “landlord-tenant dispute” and “the allegations are unfounded.”