News, Culture & Society

Son wins lawsuit against his parents for throwing away his $29,000 porn collection 

A man has won a lawsuit against his parents for getting rid of his pornography collection worth $25,000.

David Werking, 42, sued parents Beth and Paul after they threw out ‘a trove of pornography and an array of sex toys’ from their home in Grand Haven, Michigan.

The parents must now pay damages to their son for an amount which is yet to be determined. But Werking has valued the collection at $25,000 and is demanding triple that amount as punishment for ‘wanton destruction of property’.

US district judge Paul Maloney ruled in favor of Werking who said his parents had no right to throw out his collection.

He had returned home for 10 months in 2016 after a divorce before moving to Muncie, Indiana. 

But he noticed a dozen boxes of VHS tapes, DVDs, magazines and sex toys worth an estimated $25,000 were missing when they sent his possessions to his new address.

The Werkings had told their son that he could not bring the pornography to their home and if they found it, it would be destroyed. 

A man has won a lawsuit against his parents for getting rid of his pornography collection worth $29,000 (file image)

His father said in an email: ‘Frankly, David, I did you a big favor getting rid of all this stuff.’ 

The parents kept some of the pornography, which they described as ‘the worst of the worst’, in a safety deposit box out of concerns it could be illegal.

Police reviewed the X-rated material and found no evidence of illegality and no charges resulted from it. 

They then threw it away. In one email, his father Paul said to him: ‘I do not possess your pornography. It is gone. 

‘It has been either destroyed or disposed of. I may well have missed a few items that are now in your possession but, at this point, if you don’t have it, it is gone. 

‘Ditto for your sex toys and smutty magazines. 

‘We counted twelve moving boxes full of pornography plus two boxes of “sex toys” as you call them. We began that day the process of destroying them and it took quite a while to do so.’

In another email, Paul, his father, said: ‘David, I find your whole attitude toward women to be very disturbing. Women are not objects for you to masturbate with, they are people created by God just as you were and should be treated with respect and dignity.

‘Back in high school you joined a gang that made its money by distributing pornography to underage boys. I am sure that you remember the day when Mom and I discovered this and put a stop to it.

‘At that time, I destroyed all of your pornography and reported your activities to Pickerington High School officials and other parents.

‘I also warned you that if I found pornography in my house again I would destroy it.’

His father added that when he got married, he and his wife thought he’d become ‘Mary’s problem’ and they would no longer have to worry about him. 

‘At that point we figured that you were Mary’s problem and not ours. 

‘Apparently, the love of a good woman was not enough to turn you from your evil ways. After ten years of abuse, Mary had enough and kicked you out. After living on the street for a while we allowed you to live with us again despite the way you mistreated us,’ he said. 

Irate, Twerking phoned the police who then contacted his parents. 

They admitted to destroying some and said they kept some other DVDs in a safety deposit box in case it was illegal.   

Judge Maloney said: ‘There is no question that the destroyed property was David’s property. 

‘Defendants repeatedly admitted that they destroyed the property.’

Werking’s parents said they had a right to act as his landlords and had warned him not to bring pornography into the house.

Werking's parents said they had a right to act as his landlords and had warned him not to bring pornography into the house

Werking’s parents said they had a right to act as his landlords and had warned him not to bring pornography into the house

‘Defendants do not cite to any statute or caselaw to support their assertion that landlords can destroy property that they dislike,’ the judge said.

Maloney told both sides to file briefs on the financial value of the collection.

‘The court does not intend to hold an evidentiary hearing,’ he said.

Werking and his parents have until February to file written submissions outlining the total damages. 

The son’s attorney, Miles Greengard, says his client should receive treble damages, which he is entitled do under his claim of conversion of property. 

Read more at DailyMail.co.uk