I’m slightly too young (ever so slightly) to have caught the first run of Ron Jeremy’s ‘work.’ Sure, in getting out and about for this column and my other concerns in the adult field, I have seen the man enough to reach out and shake his hand as he walked by or give him a nod, as he seems to shake and nod to everybody who tries to sneak a selfie or a minute of his time. My experiences with the guy, albeit cursory as they have been, is that he is more or a less a big teddy-bear-of-a-porn-elder-statesman, kind of a mainstream figure (best a porn star can be) living legend, as far as that status can bring one in the adult business.

I guess what I am saying is that R.J. always seemed to be an amiable fellow, who just happened to always be in the vicinity of whatever new/next/biggest and brightest adult/alternative culture happening was happening.

But Mr. Jeremy is presently in a heap of trouble.

According to the L.A. district attorney, Jeremy was charged last week with twenty new counts of rape or sexual assault, involving women and one teenage girl. These new charges come two months after Jeremy was charged with the rape of three women and the sexual assault of a fourth, dating back to 2014. This would bring all his charges, spanning 16 years, to 17 victims in all, ranging in age from 15-54. During Monday’s court appearance, Jeremy plead not guilty.

He has been in jail, held on a 6.6 million-dollar bail, since June.

Among all the many high-profile sexual assault accusations leveled of late, I find Ron Jeremy’s case the most interesting. Not so much in the crimes he is being accused of (repellant as they are) but because of who he is, the particular circumstance the court of public opinion could (and is) spin on. Hard as it might be to quell our revulsion to the man’s recent charges, we must be careful not to assume a fait accompli here. Even though the guy has appeared in over 2,000 adult films since the early ’70s, we must not assume a guilt-by-reputation (in Jeremy’s case, guilt because of his work) and sidestep due process. Simply stated, flawed as it often is, completely missing the mark as it frequently does, we cannot rush to judgment and subvert the law because this particular man has taken his considerable penis out of his pants in his professional life. Even if one is disgusted by what he has done to gain his infamy, one can’t let this cloud the issue of Ron Jeremy’s guilt or innocence…neither of which I am declaring.

We need to assume the latter before the former.

I fear though where we presently are in our digital spin, quick to ‘cancel,’ if-you-ain’t-with-‘um-or-even-come-to-question-them-you-must-be-against-them culture. Assault of any kind is a serious crime and should be punished, but nothing has been proven yet, if it will be at all, in Ron Jeremy’s case.