Dumbass Joe Francis Shot An Underage Ashley Dupree

[gonzo]

NY- Ashley Dupre may have been more like a child gone wild when she bared her breasts for the "Girls Gone Wild" cameras.

Dupre's lawyers said yesterday that the video was shot in March 2003 - a month shy of the high-priced hooker's 18th birthday, making the sexy footage kiddie porn.

But "Girls Gone Wild" head honcho Joe Francis says he plans to go ahead with a release of a video of the jiggly sexpot-for-hire who brought down Gov. Spitzer because none of the tapes depict overt sexual contact.

"The lawyers looked at the tape, and said since there is no sexual contact; it doesn't matter if she was underage," he said. "It will be released."

Plus, Francis said the tape was shot later than Dupre's lawyers alleged, and he thinks it's just a ploy to forestall the tape's release - which could hurt her negotiating positions.

"There is a discrepancy between when they say it was shot and when we know it was shot. I just think it is a clever negotiating tactic," he said. Dupre's lawyer did not return several messages seeking comment.

[Hammer]

Considering how quickly he yanked his million dollar offer, I'd say it's true. Dumbass.

[EmporerEJ]

"Valid News" trumps "age" on every public occasion.

Much as he's slime, it's still "newsworthy."

[bluemoney]

Joe Francis = Worlds Richest Fucktard!

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by EmporerEJ

"Valid News" trumps "age" on every public occasion.

Much as he's slime, it's still "newsworthy."

it all depends how it is presented. In any other presentation than as "news", they would be taking a huge risk. Further, the newsworthy aspects often apply when the images are used without knowledge of the person's age - clearly knowing that someone is underage, exposing their breasts in a sexual manner pretty much makes this a risky move. I am sure his lawyers have told him it is okay, and those may be the same lawyers that helped him make the settlement in other cases in Florida.

This also draws a clear line between the GGW people and the responsible parts of the adult industry that realize that just because there may be a 1% loophole that makes the material legal under very restrictive circumstances doesn't make it a good move.

Further, I think this is a clear indication that the GGW shoots are not careful about the ages of the performers in their videos. It makes you wonder what other little secrets are out there.

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

it all depends how it is presented. In any other presentation than as "news", they would be taking a huge risk. Further, the newsworthy aspects often apply when the images are used without knowledge of the person's age - clearly knowing that someone is underage, exposing their breasts in a sexual manner pretty much makes this a risky move. I am sure his lawyers have told him it is okay, and those may be the same lawyers that helped him make the settlement in other cases in Florida.
.

All very "Fuzzy" and arguable.
A good attorney, which Joe can afford, can probably knock the shit out of it.

Free speech is a very slippery slope to start "prosecuting" for....especially on an issue like this.

[tony404]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

it all depends how it is presented. In any other presentation than as "news", they would be taking a huge risk. Further, the newsworthy aspects often apply when the images are used without knowledge of the person's age - clearly knowing that someone is underage, exposing their breasts in a sexual manner pretty much makes this a risky move. I am sure his lawyers have told him it is okay, and those may be the same lawyers that helped him make the settlement in other cases in Florida.

This also draws a clear line between the GGW people and the responsible parts of the adult industry that realize that just because there may be a 1% loophole that makes the material legal under very restrictive circumstances doesn't make it a good move.

Further, I think this is a clear indication that the GGW shoots are not careful about the ages of the performers in their videos. It makes you wonder what other little secrets are out there.

if its sold on a porn site its not news.

[Hell Puppy]

Greed amazes me.

Joe can live well the rest of his life....presumably. Let me restate that. Joe has made enough money that he SHOULD be able to live well the rest of his life.

He just got out of jail. He was fighting hard to get out of jail and really whining about being in there, so again I have to assume that is NOT a place he LIKES to be.

You'd think those two might make him take a little more conservative business approach. The greed of cashing in on a tabloid celebrity is just too much for him to pass up though.

[boobman]

Joe's got soem real balls... you see his latest title "Finally 18" - kinda edgy to hock on natioanal tv im my opinion

[tony404]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

Greed amazes me.

Joe can live well the rest of his life....presumably. Let me restate that. Joe has made enough money that he SHOULD be able to live well the rest of his life.

He just got out of jail. He was fighting hard to get out of jail and really whining about being in there, so again I have to assume that is NOT a place he LIKES to be.

You'd think those two might make him take a little more conservative business approach. The greed of cashing in on a tabloid celebrity is just too much for him to pass up though.

Or you make all that money hire id men, get them educated in finding fakes pay them well and no one gets near anything ggw til one of them lets you thru.

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by boobman

Joe's got soem real balls... you see his latest title "Finally 18" - kinda edgy to hock on natioanal tv im my opinion

It's actually one of the most amazing things, GGW is about the only true porn company that gets away with advertising on TV, I see all the time buying out 1 minute blocks after midnight. I don't know how they pull it off, considering the stuff is often fairly hardcore (girl on girl full lesbian, example).

It's truly amazing.

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

It's actually one of the most amazing things, GGW is about the only true porn company that gets away with advertising on TV, I see all the time buying out 1 minute blocks after midnight. I don't know how they pull it off, considering the stuff is often fairly hardcore (girl on girl full lesbian, example).

It's truly amazing.

Hell, they run half hour infomercials here!

[softball]

This guy is what most porn guys wannabe. No subterfuge, skirting around the legalities. He just hits it head on. Right or wrong, he is the highest profile porn dude and maybe the highest earner. The rest of it is kinda fucked up, but his income is enormous.

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

This guy is what most porn guys wannabe. No subterfuge, skirting around the legalities. He just hits it head on. Right or wrong, he is the highest profile porn dude and maybe the highest earner. The rest of it is kinda fucked up, but his income is enormous.

See the other thread, hit it head on can also be "not having morals" and "not worrying about the law". Soliciting minors to be in an adult video is bad, m'kay?

[softball]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

See the other thread, hit it head on can also be "not having morals" and "not worrying about the law". Soliciting minors to be in an adult video is bad, m'kay?

I know about the "morals" which most in this biz don't have. If the age was 16 would we all collectively say.....ooooooo that's too young and we ain't gonna have no part of that shit. Some American bureaucrat somewhere, sometime, decided 18 was it. And inflicted it upon the internet world. So this ain't no moral issue. As far as the law goes, that is up to him to fight that battle. A lot of people have fought the law and the law didn't win.

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

I know about the "morals" which most in this biz don't have. If the age was 16 would we all collectively say.....ooooooo that's too young and we ain't gonna have no part of that shit. Some American bureaucrat somewhere, sometime, decided 18 was it. And inflicted it upon the internet world. So this ain't no moral issue. As far as the law goes, that is up to him to fight that battle. A lot of people have fought the law and the law didn't win.

18 is just a number, but the number had to be drawn somewhere. It isn't just a random choice, as many things happen at 18 that change everything (although some states make kids wait until 21 to drink, they can go to war and die at 18).

We don't get to choose the rules, the rules are there. The moral question isn't "is 18 the right number" but "will I respect the law or try to end run it?"

[softball]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

18 is just a number, but the number had to be drawn somewhere. It isn't just a random choice, as many things happen at 18 that change everything (although some states make kids wait until 21 to drink, they can go to war and die at 18).

We don't get to choose the rules, the rules are there. The moral question isn't "is 18 the right number" but "will I respect the law or try to end run it?"

I believe a number of years ago they had an illegal tea party in Boston. Now tea parties are legal all across America. Now we just take them for granted because a few hooligans decided to challenge a law. Go figure.

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

I believe a number of years ago they had an illegal tea party in Boston. Now tea parties are legal all across America. Now we just take them for granted because a few hooligans decided to challenge a law. Go figure.

Revolting against taxes is one thing, trying to justify taking nude videos of minors is something that very few people will get behind. I am a big believer that the 18 is a pretty good number, and I think that porn people would have a damn hard time justifying 16 or 15 (or apparently 13, as was reported today).

The feds are after Mr Francis in a big way, and the case against him so far involved at least 4 girls that were apparently underage at the time (including a 13 year old!). I think that he would truly be the biggest dufus on the planet if he was to put the Dupree footage out there, with the full knowledge that she was underage at the time.

[softball]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Revolting against taxes is one thing, trying to justify taking nude videos of minors is something that very few people will get behind. I am a big believer that the 18 is a pretty good number, and I think that porn people would have a damn hard time justifying 16 or 15 (or apparently 13, as was reported today).

The feds are after Mr Francis in a big way, and the case against him so far involved at least 4 girls that were apparently underage at the time (including a 13 year old!). I think that he would truly be the biggest dufus on the planet if he was to put the Dupree footage out there, with the full knowledge that she was underage at the time.

When I lived in England it was 16. I am not sure that 18 is such a great number. I will agree with you on 13. BTW, the tea party analogy was just to point out that authority does need to be questioned or you wind up with shit like Homeland Security.

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

When I lived in England it was 16. I am not sure that 18 is such a great number. I will agree with you on 13. BTW, the tea party analogy was just to point out that authority does need to be questioned or you wind up with shit like Homeland Security.

IMHO, you question authority when it matters. It's just like letting your parents / wife / girlfriend / whatever make minor choices for you when it doesn't matter too much. It gives them the satisfaction of being in control, and lets you get on with the important stuff. 18 may just be a number, but it allows the government and the courts to have a measuring stick (however arbitrary) and that let's them think they told us what to do. It isn't an important thing in the end, if a girl wants to get naked and fuck on camera at 17, just get her to wait until her 18th birthday and make a real party out of it.

The English "16" rule was kind of weird, because the girl could in theory get topless for pictures, but legally, she couldn't enter into a contract to do it herself, it would require a parent (because minors cannot enter into a contract). So all of the topless Page3 girls you saw were there with full parental permission.

Not porn related, but an interesting (and sad) twist on legal age is here:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/st...errot1106.html

Even though it was the guy's birthday when the accident happened, he is attempting to get it tried in a juvenile court, because the statued reads in a way that includes your birthday in the previous year ("an adult is over 18" sort of wording).

[EmporerEJ]

It's something more than "some bureaucrat decided it was 18."

You'll find it in the 26th amendment to the US Constitution.

[softball]

Originally Posted by EmporerEJ

It's something more than "some bureaucrat decided it was 18."


You'll find it in the 26th amendment to the US Constitution.

OK, picky picky some bureaucrats.

And what does voting have to do with business?

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

OK, picky picky some bureaucrats.

And what does voting have to do with business?

It speaks to the age of being an adult.
There is case law to support that age otherwise, but the constitution is the ultimate word. It's the spot that "defines" the age of an adult, which can then be applied to the other areas of the constitution, when looking for a definition of "adult age."

We are a society of laws.....of the people, by the people, for the people. We don't have a queen or King telling us what we can, or cannot do.

That's why people dig tunnels to escape persecution INTO our country.

[softball]

We don't have a queen or King telling us what we can, or cannot do.

Functionally at the moment you do.

That's why people dig tunnels to escape persecution INTO our country.

Horse shit....

In July 2005, law enforcement personnel arrested three men who had built a 360-foot (110 m) tunnel under the border between British Columbia and Washington that they intended to use for smuggling marijuana, the first such tunnel known on this border.

Authorities have found what they call the largest and most sophisticated tunnel running into the United States along the Mexican border.The tunnel contained 2 tons of marijuana, stacked in bales, according to a statement issued by the Justice Department.

They build those tunnels to smuggle drugs. They had the underground railroad to smuggle the oppressed out of your country.

BTW, what persecution would you be referring to Emp? The economic persecution of the Mexicans?

The thing about your radical right wing nut bars is you are such easy targets. Just look at the mess your kind has made of your country in the last eight years. When are you going to smarten up? And don't preach that libertarian horse patooty. It is the card that extreme right wing nuts always play when their ship is sinking. Which it does with great regularity. Time to start building a tunnel dude. Or if you are really nice, we might let you into Canada so you can experience things like free speech and the freedom to have yourself looked after if you are sick or injured. We don't fight for our freedom, we just accept it as a fact.

[EmporerEJ]

Originally Posted by rhetorical

We don't fight for our freedom, we just accept it as a fact.

You have that Luxury, only because OUR missiles are protecting you.
Enjoy it. You shoudl'a fought harder to keep the Arrow.
By Virtue of the fact you are connected to us, we find it necessary to defend your frontier. But don't kid yourself. If there was a good reason to annex Nanook of the north, we would have done it long ago.
Keep finding more oil, and more diamonds, and we might still do it.

See "manifest destiny."

Now, I realize this is gonna wind you right up.