Puka Nacua faces ongoing civil suit after alleged New Year’s Eve biting incident; criminal charges not filed, case referred to City Attorney Hearing
Los Angeles Rams wide receiver Puka Nacua is the subject of a civil lawsuit filed by Madison Atiabi, who alleges he bit her on the shoulder and made an antisemitic remark during a New Year’s Eve gathering in Los Angeles. While the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office has not filed criminal charges, the matter has been assigned to a City Attorney Hearing—a pre-filing diversion program for eligible individuals that avoids formal prosecution. The case remains open within the statute of limitations. Nacua’s attorney acknowledges the bite occurred but characterizes it as horseplay, and denies the antisemitic comment. Nacua reportedly entered rehab following the incident. The civil case is ongoing, with discovery underway.
Both sources report the same core event and legal developments but differ in emphasis and framing. USA Today provides a more detailed account of the legal process and includes direct commentary from the accuser’s attorney, which shapes the narrative around accountability. New York Post offers a more concise, procedurally focused summary with less emphasis on narrative interpretation.
- ✓ Puka Nacua, Los Angeles Rams wide receiver, is involved in a legal matter stemming from an alleged biting incident on New Year’s Eve (December 31).
- ✓ The incident occurred after a group dinner in the Century City area of Los Angeles.
- ✓ Madison Atiabi filed a civil lawsuit against Nacua in March, alleging assault and battery, gender violence, and negligence.
- ✓ Atiabi claims Nacua bit her on the shoulder while they were in a sprinter van.
- ✓ Atiabi also alleges Nacua made an antisemitic remark—'f—k all the Jews'—during the dinner.
- ✓ The Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office has not filed criminal charges at this time.
- ✓ The case has been assigned to a City Attorney Hearing, which is a pre-filing diversion program and an alternative to misdemeanor prosecution.
- ✓ Charges are not filed, but the case remains open within the statute of limitations and can be re-evaluated.
- ✓ Nacua’s attorney, Levi McCathern, acknowledged the bite but claims it was part of horseplay and denies the antisemitic remark.
- ✓ Nacua reportedly entered a drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility after the incident.
- ✓ The civil case is ongoing, with discovery underway.
Framing of the City Attorney Hearing
Frames the hearing as a validation of the seriousness of the allegations, quoting the accuser’s attorney who calls it a 'charge for battery' and rejects the idea that it is trivial.
Describes the City Attorney Hearing as an informal proceeding aimed at alternative resolution, emphasizing it is not criminal prosecution and that charges are not filed.
Characterization of Nacua’s response and rehab admission
Describes rehab as part of a 'crisis team' strategy, implying a public relations maneuver, and uses the phrase 'dispels the false narrative' to suggest Nacua attempted to mislead the public.
Notes that Nacua’s attorney revealed he entered rehab, presented as a factual detail.
Emphasis on accuser’s perspective
Quotes Joseph Kar, the accuser’s attorney, at length, emphasizing her continued pursuit of justice and framing the hearing as a vindication.
Mentions the lawsuit and quotes the accuser’s attorney only in passing; does not include a direct statement from him.
Eligibility for diversion
Explicitly states 'It was not immediately clear whether Nacua is eligible for pretrial diversion,' introducing doubt about the process.
Does not mention uncertainty about Nacua’s eligibility for the diversion program.
Tone toward Nacua’s public image
Highlights Nacua’s status as a 'famous football player in the prime of his career,' potentially underscoring reputational stakes.
Uses neutral descriptors like 'NFL superstar' and 'two-time Pro Bowler,' maintaining a detached tone.
New York Post
Framing: New York Post frames the event as a legal procedural update, emphasizing the non-criminal nature of the current status and the possibility of future review. The focus is on the mechanics of the City Attorney Hearing rather than moral or reputational implications.
Tone: Neutral and procedural
Framing By Emphasis: Describes the City Attorney Hearing as 'an informal proceeding' and 'alternative to criminal prosecution,' framing it as a non-punitive, procedural step.
"an informal proceeding that is conducted as an alternative to a misdemeanor criminal prosecution"
Balanced Reporting: Uses neutral, descriptive language about Nacua ('NFL superstar') without editorializing.
"prosecutors have opted against filing charges against the NFL superstar for now"
Proper Attribution: Presents both the accuser’s allegations and the defense’s explanation without privileging one, including the rehab admission as a factual note.
"Nacua’s attorney, Levi McCathern, acknowledged his client did bite Atiabi, though he said it was the result of the two horseplaying"
Omission: Does not include commentary from the accuser’s attorney, omitting a potentially critical perspective.
USA Today
Framing: USA Today frames the event as a continuation of accountability, emphasizing the seriousness of the allegations and the rejection of any attempt to downplay them. The hearing is presented not as a dismissal but as a meaningful legal step.
Tone: Assertive and legally interpretive
Narrative Framing: Quotes the accuser’s attorney calling the hearing a validation that dispels a 'false narrative,' implying Nacua attempted to manipulate public perception.
"This dispels the false narrative Mr. Nacua and his crisis team tried to push to the press"
Loaded Language: Uses the phrase 'crisis team' to suggest a coordinated public relations effort, introducing a layer of editorial interpretation.
"Mr. Nacua and his crisis team"
Appeal To Emotion: Describes the hearing as having 'very serious implications,' elevating its perceived significance despite it being non-criminal.
"very serious implications for an accused defendant"
Cherry Picking: Notes uncertainty about Nacua’s eligibility for diversion, suggesting the process may not apply to him, which New York Post omits.
"It was not immediately clear whether Nacua is eligible for pretrial diversion"
Framing By Emphasis: Highlights Nacua’s professional status ('famous football player in the prime of his career') to underscore reputational stakes.
"especially for a famous football player in the prime of his career such as Makea 'Puka' Nacua"
Puka Nacua likely won’t face charges after bizarre biting incident
City attorney provides update on Puka Nacua's alleged biting incident