wow, what an article. but i can see why she didn't press charges, and i'll launch into my journalist personality (i call her raven newshawk) to explain:

1, any reporter who makes herself part of the story does a disservice to both. in this case, i can see why she does; her experience clearly illustrates his disgusting personality and the story would suffer terribly without her personal experience in it. but to press charges makes her the object of OTHER PEOPLE'S stories, and that's not a good thing. good reporters need anonymity. and god knows, i'm drowning in it. not raven, though. she's a publicity whore.

2, related to the anonymity thing: she covers the adult film industry for the LA times, according to her tagline at the bottom of the story. if she pressed charges against this numbnut, it becomes news, and her name is splashed all over the tabs, and worse, the mainstream media. she'd never get within 100 yards of a porn shoot again. nobody on her beat would talk to her, let alone open up to her or let her into their world. these people are probably very skittish about the MSM to begin with; she'd become "the reporter who sent the girls gone wild guy to jail" and every two-bit porn director and DVD mogul and 15-year-old film fornicator would run in the other direction, for fear she'd land them in jail, too.

ok, i'm back to being phaedra now.