WARNING: This article contains content that may not be suitable for all readers. Reader discretion is advised.

DOUGLAS COUNTY -- Two more civil lawsuits have been filed against Jay Link, Of Link’s Wild Safaris, alleging that he violated the rights of 10 more women by posting photos of them on a sexual fetish website without their permission.

DrydenWire.com first reported in July of 2019 that seven female plaintiffs had filed a joint civil lawsuit against Link alleging that through the use of a social website that caters to sexual fetishes, Jay Link intentionally and negligently caused each of the plaintiffs emotional distress and caused them to suffer from the invasion of privacy and defamation.

Since then, additional civil lawsuits have been filed against Jay Link in Wisconsin Circuit Court including one that was filed in April 2020 by 3 female plaintiffs, and in which the Court has ordered Link to pay in excess of $400,000 to the 3 plaintiffs. Another that was filed by one female plaintiff in October of 2019 is now scheduled for a Jury Trial in October 2021.

Two more lawsuits were recently filed against Link in September and November of 2020 containing allegations nearly identical to the civil lawsuit previously reported on by DrydenWire.com.

A total of ten additional female plaintiffs are alleging that Jay Link intentionally and negligently caused each of them emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and defamation through the use of a social website that caters to sexual fetishes.

Listed below is a bullet-point list summarizing the allegations contained in these two recent civil lawsuits filed against Jay Link.

  1. Due to the nature of this action, as described below, all plaintiffs are named fictitiously and their addresses not provided in this public filing but will, upon demand, be provided to the defendant; the release of the names and addresses of the plaintiffs will result in additional privacy violations and emotional distress for all plaintiffs, which they have already suffered due to the actions described herein.
  2. The defendant, Jay E. Link, is an adult resident of the State of Wisconsin residing at 16279 S. Bond Lake Estate Road in Wascott, Wisconsin.
  3. FetLife.com (hereinafter FetLife) is a social media website that describes itself as “the Social Network for the BDSM, Fetish & Kinky Community. Life Facebook, but run by kinksters like you and me.. .”
  4. FetLife boasts over 9.1 million members as of September 13, 2020.
  5. Users of FetLife create profiles, much like users of the Facebook website and are known as “members”. Membership with FetLife is free, does not require any age verification and only requires the ability to receive a text to subscribe. There is no screening by FetLife as to whether the person subscribing is a sex offender or otherwise a danger to the public. Once a member, each member can post writings, photographs, and videos.
  6. Some members of FetLife maintain pseudo screen names to maintain their anonymity.
  7. Upon information and belief, the Defendant created and controlled an account with FetLife with a screen name of“Sexsafari”. All references to as “user Sexsafari” hereafter, refer to the FetLife account maintained and controlled by the Defendant. Upon information and belief, the Defendant started posting photographs and commentary sometime around February of 2017.
  8. The FetLife member known as Sexsafari posted over 1,000 photos, the earliest being identified on FetLife as posted approximately two years prior to February 2019 and the most recent being posted in January and February of 2019.
  9. A majority of the photos posted by the user Sexsafari reflected women, although there were some photos depicting men engaged in sexual acts with women.
  10. Some of the photos of women posted by the user Sexsafari appeared to be photos that the women took themselves, clothed and in every-day arenas (such as at work, at the beach, at home, etc.)
  11. Most of the other photos were not taken by the women themselves and depicted the women nude or partially nude and/or engaged in various sexual acts.
  12. Most of the photos posted by the user Sexsafari included captions.
  13. Almost every photo caption labeled the woman depicted a “Slut” and then provided her first name (i.e. “Slut Sara”).
  14. Some of the names of the women were very unique.
  15. The user Sexsafari never provided his name, and instead referred to himself as “Master.”
  16. The user Sexsafari never posted a photo of himself clearly showing his face such that he could be identified, although he posted photos of many women that made them identifiable.
  17. The user Sexsafari posted photos with captions indicating that he (“Master”) engaged in sexual acts with the women depicted.
  18. The user Sexsafari posted in several captions that he had “trained” or was “training” the woman in the photo.
  19. The FetLife platform allowed all 7,500,000+ other members of FetLife to see the photos posted by user Sexsafari as well as the comments on those photos. Further, all of the other members on FetLife were able to make their own comments.
  20. Many different FetLife users posted comments on the 1000+ photos posted by the user SexSafari. As stated above, the members/users of FetLife are not screened and often maintain pseudo screen names. These users could be from anywhere in the world.
  21. In some of his responses and posts, the user Sexsafari indicated that he is interested in trades with his “sluts.”
  22. Indeed, some photos posted by the user FetLife purported to show the user Sexsafari engaged in sexual acts with at least one woman who was allegedly traded to him.
  23. Other FetLife users posted comments indicating they would like to engage in sexual acts with the woman depicted and asked if she was interested in further sexual acts. The user Sexsafari would sometimes respond and indicated the woman would be interested in doing so.
  24. The actions by Sexsafari in providing photos and commentary on his “trained sluts” and their willingness to be traded or engage in sexual acts with other men conveyed the idea that these women act at the direction of the user Sexsafari and are available for sexual contact with other FetLife users.
  25. The user Sexsafari also indicated in regards to several women that he had “bred” them or that they wanted to be bred. On at least one occasion, Sexsafari indicated he had “bred” a woman and her boyfriend thought the child belonged to him and not to Sexsafari.
  26. User Sexsafari posted photos showing the faces of women and their first names.
  27. Most of the Plaintiffs were Facebook friends with Jay Link at some point.
  28. Some of the photos posted on FetLife by the user Sexsafari of the Plaintiffs were images from their personal Facebook pages.
  29. Some of the plaintiffs had intimate photos taken of them that were subsequently posted on Facebook by the user Sexsafari and those plaintiffs were able to identify Jay Link as the individual who took these photos.
  30. While the user SexSafari does not reveal his full face on his FetLife profile, there are many photos showing parts of his body (including his genitals, his arms, the top of his head, etc.)
  31. Plaintiff one was able to identify Jay Link as the male reflected in many of the photos posted on FetLife by user Sexsafari.
  32. Jay Link, upon information and belief, owns a company known as “Link’s Wild Safaris” and frequently travels on safaris.
  33. The user Sexsafari lists himself as being 49 years old on his FetLife profile
  34. Jay Link, upon information and belief, was 49 years old at the time the images were discovered on FetLife.

One of the lawsuits, filed on September 23, 2020, lists eight female plaintiffs with the following charges against Link:

Charges:

Jane Doe 1 (from Wisconsin):

  • Count 1: Invasion of Privacy in Violation of Wis. Stat. Sec. 995.50
  • Count 2: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 3: Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 4: Defamation
  • Count 5: Punitive Damages

Jane Doe 2 (from Canada):

  • Count 6: Invasion of Privacy in Violation of Wis. Stat. Sec. 995.50
  • Count 7: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 8: Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 9: Defamation
  • Count 10: Punitive Damages

Jane Doe 3 (from Wisconsin):

  • Count 11: Invasion of Privacy in Violation of Wis. Stat. Sec. 995.50
  • Count 12: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 13: Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 14: Defamation
  • Count 15: Punitive Damages

Jane Doe 4 (from Texas):

  • Count 16: Invasion of Privacy in Violation of Wis. Stat. Sec. 995.50
  • Count 17: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 18: Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 19: DefamationCount 20: Punitive Damages

Jane Doe 5 (from Wisconsin):

  • Count 21: Invasion of Privacy in Violation of Wis. Stat. Sec. 995.50
  • Count 22: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 23: Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 24: Defamation
  • Count 25: Punitive Damages

Jane Doe 6 (from Minnesota):

  • Count 26: Invasion of Privacy in Violation of Wis. Stat. Sec. 995.50
  • Count 27: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 28: Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 29: Defamation
  • Count 30: Punitive Damages

Jane Doe 7 (from Wisconsin):

  • Count 31: Invasion of Privacy in Violation of Wis. Stat. Sec. 995.50
  • Count 32: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 33: Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 34: Defamation
  • Count 35: Punitive Damages

Jane Doe 8 (from Wisconsin):

  • Count 36: Invasion of Privacy in Violation of Wis. Stat. Sec. 995.50
  • Count 37: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 38: Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 39: Defamation
  • Count 40: Punitive Damages

Another lawsuit, filed on November 5, 2020, lists two additional female plaintiffs with the following charges against Link.

Charges:

Jane Doe 1 (from Wisconsin):

  • Count 1: Invasion of Privacy in Violation of Wis. Stat. Sec. 995.50
  • Count 2: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 3: Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 4: Defamation
  • Count 5: Punitive Damages

Jane Doe 2 (from Wisconsin):

  • Count 6: Invasion of Privacy in Violation of Wis. Stat. Sec. 995.50
  • Count 7: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 8: Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress
  • Count 9: Defamation
  • Count 10: Punitive Damages

Share This Article