Ray Guhn and Co. face more charges

[gonzo]

PENSACOLA, Fla. - Adult movie-maker Clinton McCowen, known in the industry as Ray Guhn, along with others employed by his business, may face additional charges stemming from their June arrests on obscenity, solicitation of prostitution, and racketeering charges, according to the lead prosecutor in the case.

On Thursday, Florida Assistant State Attorney Russ Edgar told the Navarre (Fla.) Press that another person will be arrested in the case, “and we probably will be adding charges on at least one of [the defendants].”
McCowen, 45, Kevin Patrick Stevens, 36, and Andrew Kevin Craft, 38, operated Ray Guhn Productions and the six-year-old adult affiliate program CashTitans.com, which generated revenues of more than $1 million per year, according to court documents. The businesses fell under scrutiny when neighbors complained that Guhn and his associates shot adult movies at four residences in Escambia and Santa Rose counties and sought “local talent” for sexually explicit movie roles paying as much as $1,000. Within the past five years, more than 100 people accepted offers to appear in the adult movies, according to the indictments.

... more of the story here (http://www.avnonline.com/index.php?Primary_Navigation=Editorial&Action=View_Article&Content_ID=275406)

Put your donations directly to work. Instead of joining or renewing your membership to the FSC send that money to the RayGuhn Defense Fund.

[TheEnforcer]

I hope he wins his case.

[Hipchick]

On Thursday he told the Navarre Press, “The attempt to use the prostitution statutes to censor erotic movies has not been tried in Florida before.” However, Walters has noted in the past, People v. Freeman (1994) declared the use of prostitution statutes to censor adult materials unconstitutional, thereby setting up California as one of the few states in which the production of sexually explicit materials is explicitly protected. He said a court’s rejection of the state’s arguments in the current cases could result in significant additional protection for the adult entertainment industry in Florida, as well.


http://www.oprano.com/banners/rayguhn/728x90_2.gif (http://www.rayguhndefensefund.com/)

[Hammer]

Much of this case depends on the People vs. Freeman case, but the problem will be if the private parties charges are accurate. Then it becomes more than just a porn case. The unfortunate side effect will be that if they do lose on charges that don't involve producing porn, it could affect all of us anyway because of the way the case is being touted to the press.

[JohnV]

Much of this case depends on the People vs. Freeman case, but the problem will be if the private parties charges are accurate. Then it becomes more than just a porn case. The unfortunate side effect will be that if they do lose on charges that don't involve producing porn, it could affect all of us anyway because of the way the case is being touted to the press.

And of course, the U.S. media will do almost whatever it can to make this into a dramatic event with GB and his cronies turning it into an even bigger PORN case and convincing the population how evil porn is and how all people involved in this industry are scum and so on.... -end of early morning rant- sorry...

Hammer, you are probably correct in your statement re: private parties charges.

[woodysm]

And of course, the U.S. media will do almost whatever it can to make this into a dramatic event with GB and his cronies turning it into an even bigger PORN case and convincing the population how evil porn is and how all people involved in this industry are scum and so on.... -end of early morning rant- sorry...

Hammer, you are probably correct in your statement re: private parties charges.

John you know that since this is an election year they probably will want to make an example out of this. I am not sure but I heard that the new 2257 rules will also apply to keywords - once again not sure if that is correct and how they will enforce it if it is true. Colbert once said GOP stands for Gods own party - end of my noon rant LOL

[woodysm]

After my last post I came across this bit of info so thought I would share. As I am usually the last to know this may be old news for you guys :)

Washington — The U.S. Senate Commerce Committee, with the backing of the Bush administration, approved an amendment to a wide-ranging telecommunications bill that would require mandatory website labeling on pages that contain explicit sexual images. The entire communications bill still has a way to go before it can be signed into law, however. It must receive a final vote from the commerce committee and then the full Senate. The bill also would have to be reconciled with a House of Representatives version, championed by John Kyl, R-Ariz., which does not contain a mandatory labeling provision.

Both proposals were prompted by a speech from Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in April, who called on Congress to act quickly to “prevent people from inadvertently stumbling across pornographic images on the Internet.”

According to CNET News, which has seen a copy of the bill, websites must not place sexually graphic images on their homepage, and they must rate “each page or screen of the website that does contain sexually explicit material,” according to a system to be determined by the Federal Trade Commission.

Webmasters who fail to properly label their sites would face up to five years in prison, according to the proposal.
“This will protect children from accidentally typing in the wrong address and immediately viewing indecent material,” Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., said. “[Politicians] have to take a bold step in this world of danger to our kids, and there are some people out there who prey on young children and they use the Internet and other methods to feed their sickness.”

First Amendment Attorney Lawrence G. Walters offers a different point of view.
“Forcing speech on a publisher is problematic,” Walters told XBIZ. “I’m not against voluntary labeling. In fact, we need to do that to ward off government regulation. Many adult sites label their content with warning pages, but it might not have been widespread enough. I think the government will find that voluntary labeling is pervasive among adult sites, but we don’t have a uniform system. Most adult sites already comply.”
Walters mentioned the video game, music and movie industries as examples of the effective use of self-labeling.

“Unfortunately, web content has been fractured and inconsistent with labeling because of how unwieldy the international web is,” Walters said, citing the Internet’s tremendous worldwide scope and operations. “Depending on the final wording — and it still has a long way to go yet — I think this [bill] would technically be hard to enforce given how much content is out there. It’s unfortunate the adult industry couldn’t do enough to head off this type of legislation.

[gonzo]

Labeling
.xxx
They are pushing hard!