Fred Davis: Redskins Tight End Represents Himself in Bizarre Lawsuit

About 18 months ago, Redskins tight end Fred Davis allegedly dumped juice on a woman's head at a Washington, DC, nightclub. On Wednesday, the lengthy and bizarre lawsuit that stemmed from the incident finally came to an end—for now.

Makini R. Chaka filed a civil complaint against Davis after the initial incident and, according to the Luke Mullins of the Washingtonian, was granted a temporary restraining order in January 2011—but the case was far from over. Chaka later sued Davis for a permanent stay-away order, damages and injunctive relief, leading to court drama so out of the ordinary that you will have a hard time believing it isn't all fabricated. 

The drama began at Josephine Nightclub and Lounge in DC in January 2011, when Davis' friends threw him a surprise party. According to the Washingtonian, witnesses testified that as the party grew, a promoter suggested that Davis and his friends move to a different part of the club, where Chaka was located. The only problem was that Davis' and Chaka's relationship had "turned frosty," and being in the same vicinity was likely to produce mayhem. 

According to Davis' testimony, he approached Chaka's table and informed her that he and his party would be moving closer to her, then lightly touched her wrist.

According to Chaka, Davis approached her, violently grabbed her wrist and swore at her, so she responded by throwing a drink in his face. Davis allegedly retaliated by dumping a pitcher of juice on Chaka's head and throwing a flask at her, busting her lip.

Security footage, however, shows that someone else's elbow struck Chaka's lip and caused the injury.

Chaka alleges, in documents obtained by the Washingtonian, that in the ensuing months, Davis has repeatedly violated the restraining order the courts levied against him and has impersonated Redskins wide receiver Santana Moss in order to blacklist her from a nightclub.

In the most bizarre turn of the story, because it does get more bizarre, Davis—instead of hiring legal counsel—chose to represent himself in court. He was once represented by Jean Kuei, who is reportedly his ex-girlfriend and stopped representing him in May 2011. 

According to the Washingtonian, Davis argued on his own behalf in court in April, telling a judge that Chaka's claims are "made up and flagellant."

Though the judge on the case ruled that Chaka failed to prove conclusively that Davis violated his restraining order, the case is scheduled to go to trial in March 2013, because the two sides couldn't come to an agreement during mediation in January.

You may be wondering who, exactly, this Chaka character is. While she classifies herself as a celebrity party planner of sorts who works with singers, rappers and athletes, her longtime friend Stewart Prince—who has served as Davis' bodyguard—has a different perspective of Chaka's occupation.

In court documents obtained by the Washingtonian, he alleged that Chaka is a "madam/pimpette" who recruits women to "provide sexual favors for athletes or other entertainer[s] in exchange for money."

Prince also claimed that Chaka is often seen out and about carrying her pimp cup.

Chaka, of course, denied the pimpette allegations, testifying in court (via the Washingtonian):

"

[Davis is] trying to paint a picture of me as someone that I am not, as opposed to a college educated female that runs her own business, that happens to be successful and works with various stars.

"

According to the Washingtonian, Chaka has a history of "aggressive encounters," including threatening a coworker and fighting with other women after a party at a male friend's home.

You also might be wondering how all of this drama affected Davis' play on the field. It didn't, really. In the season following the incident, Davis was en route to a career year in which he tallied 59 receptions for 796 yards before being suspended in December for failing multiple drug tests.

Hopefully he has enough time to spend dissecting the playbook with RG3 this season before he's due in court again.