Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
A woman from New York agreed to shoot a series foot fetish An online content creator filmed the video on the condition that her identity remain 100 percent obscured, only to discover her face – which she was reportedly told would be blurred beyond recognition – was instead completely exposed.
One clip shows the woman’s feet “restrained in the stocks” while Gerald “Trey” Grover of Flashy Feet Productions is being “tickled.” [her] The legs are using different tools,” according to a state lawsuit against the 29-year-old Trenton man. new Jersey, Man.
“The caption of this video…describes [woman] In her complaint the woman, identified only as “Jane Roe” in court filings, describes him as ‘terrified’, ‘turned on’ and ‘completely addicted’.
A second clip posted online also shows Roe’s candid face, describing him as a man who “just loves to have his feet worshiped and tickled,” the complaint said.
In the third video, Roe’s feet were again submerged in restraints as Grover “licks and tickles” [her] feet while [she] According to the complaint, she breathes heavily. The description of the footage said that Roe let out a few moans that she didn’t want to let out… her body was betraying her. That subtle shift from resistance to submission?”
When he finally discovered that his face was clearly visible for all to see, the horrified Roe hired a Representative To step up, the complaining continues. It says Grover agreed to “immediately delete” the videos and guaranteed he would repost them only if Roe’s face was completely pixelated. However, according to the complaint, Grover “continued to publish and distribute sexual videos.” [Roe] With inadequate pixelation, he was rendered unrecognizable and further humiliated and harmed.
Roe’s image has since been viewed thousands of times online, the complaint says.
“The unauthorized dissemination of these videos has also caused damage [Roe’s] Personal and professional reputation,” it says, “as well as his or her sense of security and privacy.”
Grover said in an email on Wednesday Independent“Thank you for reaching out. I am not commenting at this time.”
Roe’s attorney Frank Iacono also declined to discuss the case, saying, “As I’m sure you can understand, I am not able to supplement the public record with any additional comment.”
According to a review by the accounts involved, the videos have now been removed.
foot fetish have become somewhat mainstream In recent years, with Countless iterations and downs For enthusiasts to explore. Singer Lily Allen – who has a five-star rating on Wikifeet – now says Earns more by selling feet photos on OnlyFans As much as she makes from Spotify streams. In 2010, former New York Jets head coach Rex Ryan and his wife outed as foot buffcomedian Sarah Silverman once described the experience Dating a “footed person” was once described as “weird and wonderful”, and iconic pop artist Andy Warhol was reportedly such a committed pedophile, he kept a mummified human foot near his bed,
Roe’s entanglement with Grover began on October 27, 2024, when she sent the Long Islander an unsolicited DM on Instagram asking if she would be willing to participate in a video shoot “containing foot fetish content,” she explains. Complaintwhich was initially filed in Suffolk County, New York, Supreme Court on August 4 and is moving forward following a September 29 order in which the presiding judge allowed Roe’s petition to remain anonymous throughout the proceedings.
Roe’s complaint states that she initially declined Grover’s invitation, but after he assured her that he would “arrange” for her face to be blurred in any footage, she agreed to do so.
According to the complaint, the first shooting took place on October 29, 2024, while the second took place in early November. Grover posted the video on November 9, 2024 x The complaint continues, while tickling Roe’s feet herself – without informing Roe, whose unpixelated face was displayed front and center.
While Roe was unaware of what was happening, Grover continued to share the footage publicly, the complaint continues. On November 19, 2024, he posted the video blue sky The complaint states that Roe’s “feet were worshiped and tickled”, again with her face completely exposed.
On December 7, 2024, Roe learned that the video had been posted with her face blurred, and “immediately confronted” Grover in a direct message. InstagramAccording to the complaint. She followed up with a cease-and-desist letter sent by her lawyer two days later demanding that the video in question be removed.
The complaint states that Grover attempted to deny any agreement between the two regarding obscuring Roe’s face, but Roe handed him a copy of her DMs, which memorialized the agreement. On December 13, 2024, Grover agreed to a resolution, vowing to “immediately remove all material appearing from publication.” [Roe’s] face,” and that any future content will be “pixelated” [sic] or blurred [Roe’s] face it like this [Roe] Not identifiable,” according to the complaint.
,[Grover] Presented [Roe] With an edited version of a short video clip shot to serve as an example of the level of pixelation, which [Roe] Found acceptable,” the complaint states.
As promised, Grover removed the video he posted showing Roe’s face x On November 9, 2024, according to the complaint. But, the complaint alleges, he failed to remove a video he posted that showed Roe’s face. blue skySo, on December 29, 2024, Roe’s attorney sent a second cease-and-desist letter demanding Grover to remove the video from XOptions — which he immediately did, the complaint states.
From there six months passed without any incident. Then, on July 7, 2025, Grover posted the video on Roe’s Instagram and Instagram. FeetThe complaint says. According to the complaint, this time, there was “some pixelation” on Roe’s face, it was “significantly less” than the example he had approved. Accordingly, Roe’s face was recognizable in the footage, the complaint argues.
The complaint alleges that on July 20, 2025, Grover attacked X again by posting another video, which exposed Roe’s identity. According to the complaint, as before, the pixelation was insufficient to keep Roe’s identity secret.
It said that “due to the public and private dissemination of these videos, [Roe] Significant emotional distress, damage to reputation and other damages.
Grover, on the other hand, argues that she did nothing wrong and claims that Roe knew exactly what she was doing.
In an August 8 motion to dismiss, Grover, who is representing himself in court, denied “willfulness, lack of consent, and any intentional performance.” [Roe’s] Any violation of the agreement will be dealt with.” The motion claims that Rowe “reviewed and approved the footage in which she appeared and demonstrated consent/waiver to continue participating,” noting that Rowe “also styled her hair in a specific manner for the second shoot.”
Grover’s motion also objects to claims that he did not adequately blur Roe’s face, insisting that he follow “agreed precedent” and that he also pixelated the ident. tattooIncluding one on Roe’s right arm. (He unsuccessfully fought Roe’s request to remain anonymous in court, arguing that a pseudonym would be unnecessary given, among other things, his “prior voluntary participation in publicly released and commercially distributed media.” By court order, he is prohibited from using Roe’s name in any of his opposition filings.)
Roe’s lawsuit claims invasion of privacy, abuse of likeness and intentional infliction of emotional distress under New York and New Jersey law.
She is asking the court to determine compensatory, statutory and punitive damages; attorneys’ fees and costs; And an injunction forces Grover to remove any remaining content featuring Roe’s face, as well as prohibiting him from posting “any video or image” with her likeness.