Reporter may testify in Girls Gone Wild case

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by KevinG

There's lots of things going on with the Joe Francis case, Vic.

There's tax evasion and "child porn" where two 17 year olds lied that they are 18.

Yes, it was stupid to not do the right job in checking IDs, but 17 is sure different than 9, 10, or 11 ... or younger. Technically, against the law ... just like the infamous Traci Lords.

I think there should be some penalty for bitches that lie about their age and then cry foul.

Anyway, I didn't really want to start a debate about that, but it's probably too late now.

What is really curious with the news article I posted is I don't really have a clue what this is about.

Meaning, what is the judge up to with this?

He is making a reporter testify as to what the state attorney showed him .. like did he show him what is technically CP?

Is the attorney going to be brought up on CP charges?

You "jumped the shark" on your Traci comparison.....

1st of all, shots taken at ANY age in public, teeter on the fuzzy line of "news reporting" or commercial venture. And while we all know damn well Joe is a commercial enterprise, garnering less constitutional protection (however that is rationalized) there would still be a "presumption of innocence" argument there.
Lest, as you note, we completely ignore this underage child, which is apparently outside the control of the parent? By several states perhaps? Where is the parent? Where is THERE punishment for their minor child creating a public nuisance and their tacit endorsement of child porn?

And then, let's add insult to injury....bring suit against the guy that was standing there photographing it?

As for Traci, it's not a fair comparison. This bitch had photo ID showing a valid age, a mother that swore she was of age, and eagerly participated. Then, used the system to vault herself into lucrative acting gigs on the "poor me, destroyed by the evil industry." And the talent agency guy goes to jail?
PLEASE.

Where was the fraud charge against her, against the mother? Where was the promoting child pornography, pandering, etc against the mother?
No, of course not, she's a victim too........


Yes, I would like to know what the judges motivation/goal is here?