Billionaire's Penthouse Pet opens up on her sexual past and obsession with older men in harrowing 129-page defense 48%

By Jeremy Louwerse0%

7/1/2026, 5:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Biased Writer Voice, and Anecdotal, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 42.3% saturation with 264 hits. Analysis detected 1,583 faulty-reasoning hits from 624 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 48.9% and a BS Rank of 48% (11,544 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 52.70% of the article peer group.

A Penthouse Pet who’s been accused of stealing from wealthy older men has revealed intimate details about her relationship with older billionaire fiancé Stephen Cloobeck  while opening up on her harrowing past of sexual abuse and obsession with older men. 
Bride-to-be Adva Lavie, 28, and Cloobeck, 64, reveal details of their relationship to psychologist Dr. 
Robert Brodie in 129 pages of newly unsealed documents in her felony case. 
The medical evaluation is part of a motion filed by Lavie and her lawyers to avoid jail through a diversion program. 
“During my discussion with Mr. 
Cloobeck, he expressed true compassion for Ms. 
Lavie,” Dr. 
Brodie sats, 
“Ms. 
Lavie, in return, also expressed compassion and a desire to develop a strong relationship with Mr. 
Cloobeck.” 
“Both individually stated their relationship would be monogamous, this is something Ms. 
Lavie has not experienced with any other men.” 
The evaluation by Dr. 
Brodie is based on three sessions of clinical interviews that lasted for about 15.5 hours. 
The evaluation details alleged abuse by men at X-rated sex parties, and by her porn star first husband Edan Ives, also known as “Big Nick, who allegedly had a desire for an open relationship. 
“Soon into the relationship… her ex-husband communicated that he wanted an arrangement in which he could sleep with other women alongside Ms. 
Lavie,” the papers say. 
Lavie agreed to the threesomes in 2022 hoping it would relieve her from the constant rough sex with her then husband, the papers say. 
Lavie said her ”modelling work” involved attending sex parties where she was often abused by the men, often under the influence of marijuana, cocaine, MDMA, ecstasy, mushrooms, and ketamine, the papers state. 
“At the parties the women were required to participate in various sexual activities ranging from individual sex, to group sex, to being traded throughout the men and they were subject to violent sexual acts,” Dr. 
Brodie said. 
A motion filed last week alleged that Lavie had been abused by her father, and was forced to snort cocaine when she was a $1000 a night escort in Las Vegas. 
The papers say she is in treatment. 
Lavie and Cloobeck were engaged in February in Las Vegas, they were scheduled to marry June 18th in Israel, but the date has since been moved. 
Cloobeck, a one-time major donor to disgrace Democrat gubernatorial candidate Eric Swalwell, is also facing several felonies after allegedly tampering with witnesses in Lavie’s case. 
Some of those witnesses include older men who Lavie met on “Sugar Daddy” websites and allegedly stole from. 
She faces a decade behind bars. 
The evaluation says Lavie told Dr. 
Brodie she has been attracted to older men most of her life. 
“One of her first crushes was ‘on my professor in high school, I always liked older men,’ the papers say. 
“Ms. 
Lavie’s early experiences created her dynamic of attraction to older men and to men with power or influence,” the evaluation says. 
Lavie is charged with six felonies, including two counts of grand theft, two counts of burglary, and two counts of unauthorized use of personal identifying information. 
She allegedly met multiple older men on dating apps and stole from their homes. 
Lavie, who is wearing an ankle monitor, and her lawyers have been using several tactics for months to avoid any jail time. 
Lavie has continuously broken the court rules. 
She was caught by the judge obtaining an Israeli passport, crossed Los Angeles County lines, and allegedly contacted witnesses. 
Despite the violations, county Superior Court Judge Diego Edber has stopped short of locking her up. 
Lavie’s diversion hearing is scheduled in a Los Angeles courtroom on August 10th. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.9%Jeremy Louwerse: 3.6%California Post: 4.1%Confirmation Bias5.9%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 1.2%California Post: 1.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 12.7%Jeremy Louwerse: 4.5%California Post: 4.2%Availability Heuristic12.7%This article: 5.1%Jeremy Louwerse: 1.0%California Post: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic5.1%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.2%California Post: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 2.4%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.9%California Post: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias2.4%This article: 11.1%Jeremy Louwerse: 11.7%California Post: 10.3%Framing Effect11.1%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.6%California Post: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 2.6%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.2%California Post: 0.6%Status Quo Bias2.6%This article: 3.5%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.3%California Post: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect3.5%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.4%California Post: 2.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.4%California Post: 1.5%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 42.3%Jeremy Louwerse: 19.2%California Post: 16.0%Negativity Bias42.3%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 2.7%California Post: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 7.2%Jeremy Louwerse: 2.0%California Post: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error7.2%This article: 3.5%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.3%California Post: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias3.5%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 1.4%California Post: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 2.6%California Post: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 2.6%Jeremy Louwerse: 1.9%California Post: 3.1%Halo Effect2.6%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.7%California Post: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.2%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.8%California Post: 1.6%Recency Bias4.2%This article: 1.9%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.5%California Post: 0.5%Primacy Effect1.9%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 4.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 2.7%California Post: 2.6%Ad Hominem4.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.3%California Post: 0.5%Straw Man0.0%This article: 3.5%Jeremy Louwerse: 3.9%California Post: 4.2%Appeal to Authority3.5%This article: 2.6%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.6%California Post: 1.5%False Dilemma2.6%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.0%California Post: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.2%California Post: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.1%Jeremy Louwerse: 4.0%California Post: 5.5%Hasty Generalization5.1%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.7%California Post: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.6%California Post: 1.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 34.3%Jeremy Louwerse: 10.6%California Post: 8.9%Appeal to Emotion34.3%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 1.3%California Post: 1.1%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 9.1%Jeremy Louwerse: 1.8%California Post: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)9.1%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 8.5%Jeremy Louwerse: 2.3%California Post: 0.8%Burden of Proof8.5%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.2%California Post: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 19.4%Jeremy Louwerse: 3.7%California Post: 3.6%Anecdotal19.4%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.5%Jeremy Louwerse: 3.6%California Post: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.5%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.0%California Post: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.0%California Post: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.4%California Post: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.5%California Post: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 13.1%Jeremy Louwerse: 2.9%California Post: 3.2%Unattributed Quote13.1%This article: 6.4%Jeremy Louwerse: 2.7%California Post: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection6.4%This article: 30.1%Jeremy Louwerse: 16.4%California Post: 13.1%Biased Writer Voice30.1%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.7%California Post: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.4%California Post: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 4.2%California Post: 3.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias4.0%This article: 0.0%Jeremy Louwerse: 0.7%California Post: 6.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

624 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker1.0%attributed speech618writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageDr. Robert Brodie • 2 words • 0.0% coverageDr. Robert Brodie • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageDr. Robert Brodie • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Dr. Robert Brodie

0%flagged-word coverage
6 attributed words100% of attributed speech83% writer coverage
0%17.5%35.0%Biased Writer Voice-30.4 ptsWriter: 30.4%Dr. Robert Brodie: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-13.3 ptsWriter: 13.3%Dr. Robert Brodie: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-6.5 ptsWriter: 6.5%Dr. Robert Brodie: 0.0%0.0%Politically Right Leaning -4.0 ptsWriter: 4.0%Dr. Robert Brodie: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.