Over the weekend, an allegation was made by Mavi De Mars – namely that she was raped by Israeli DJ and producer Guy Gerber. Mars provided a detailed account on her social media pages, alleging that Gerber gave her a spiked drink and then proceeded to carry out a rape. He denies all the allegations.
The incident is alleged to have happened in Mykonos, Greece on 21st July 2013. Mars claims Gerber offered her some alcohol and what she says was “a stimulant drug” and that the “last thing I remember is him putting his arm around me and walking me to his bedroom as my consciousness dimmed down to complete darkness.”
“I regained my awareness about 4/5 hours later, waking up in total confusion next to him naked in the bed with zero recollection of anything that happened but sharp pain between my legs. Bruising that remained for almost 3 days and which I vividly still very much remember 9 years later.”.
After that, Gerber’s social media accounts went silent – Ears To The House made queries to Gerber’s management on the matter on Sunday, but did not receive a response. However, he has now issued a statement across his social media to the claims made against him. Here’s the full version.
In short, Gerber denies the allegation of rape. He admits that Mars did have sexual intercourse with him, but claimed it was consensual – and also appears to suggest she was feeling guilty afterwards, alleging infidelity played a part. He also questions a number of aspects of the account presented by Mavi De Mars, and thanked a number of people who have supported him during this “very difficult time”.
Gerber also mentions that he’s taking legal action – but it’s not entirely clear from the document he posts what this actually means. Whilst Gerber can obviously pursue whichever legal avenues he chooses over this matter, the traditional route to take when suing someone for writing something they believe to be defamatory is libel – something his Spanish documentation makes no reference to.
As you might have seen before here on Ears To The House, we expect we’ll be coming back to this one…
We’ve had a few questions in the inbox asking why we didn’t publish this story earlier. Ears To The House first became aware of the allegations shortly after they were posted at the weekend. Without going into too much detail about our internal processes, we did carefully consider running the story at the time – but ultimately decided against due to legal reasons.
Comments are not available on this article for legal reasons.
