More Than 100 Warrants Served Against 'Girls Gone Wild' Crew

mycfnow ^

[Notwithstanding]

What these guys did is largely illegal in all 50 states. "I didn't know she was only 17" does not hold up in court when you fail to ask for photo ID.

State Laws on Obscenity, Child Pornography and Harassment

---

Background Information

All 50 states and the District of Columbia have laws governing obscenity, child pornography, and harassment. Prepared by Ronald J. Palenski, Partner, Gordon & Glickson P.C., what follows is a general commentary on these laws plus a state-by-state overview on the extent to which they may apply in on-line or other digital environments.

Obscenity

All states have laws governing the distribution of obscene materials. Generally, these statutes prohibit the sale, lending, renting, giving, publication, exhibition or other dissemination of materials, with general knowledge of their obscene character and content. Drafted before an electronic age, many states define “materials” as covering any writing, written matter, picture, pictorial representation, film or motion picture, or sound recording.

“Obscenity” is typically defined as material which, to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, and taken as a whole: 1) predominantly appeals to prurient interests, 2) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value, and 3) depicts or describes nudity, sex, or excretion in a patently offensive way. Of course, what constitutes the relevant “community” in on-line environments without geographic boundaries is an open issue.

In a very few states, obscenity laws cover the dissemination of tangible material only, a matter of some importance given the debate in other areas of the law whether computer software or other information in digital format is tangible or intangible.* Similarly, many states prohibit the distribution of electronic or electrical reproductions of obscene material. Presumably such statutes cover obscene material in digital format; note, however, that ambiguities in criminal statutes are to be construed strictly against the state and in favor of the accused.

A very few states prohibit the distribution of obscene materials to minors only; distribution to adults is not prohibited.

Child Pornography

All states prohibit child pornography. “Child pornography” may encompass either: 1) the creation or reproduction of materials depicting minors engaged in actual or simulated sexual activity (“Sexual Exploitation of Minors”) or 2) the publication or distribution of obscene, indecent, or harmful materials to minors. All such laws require actual knowledge, or reason to know, that the person portrayed or the recipient of the obscene, indecent, or harmful material is a minor. A few states also penalize the distribution, with reckless disregard, of obscene or indecent materials to minors. The states generally provide defenses to the publisher or distributor where some reasonable attempt has been made to discern the age of the recipient of the obscene, indecent, or harmful material.

As noted above, most state statutes reach beyond what is deemed to be “obscene” for adults to prohibit the distribution of material that has been determined to be “harmful to minors,” including that which is indecent or excessively violent. As with obscenity statutes generally, what is “harmful to minors” is to be determined with reference to the local “community.” Note, too, that the definition of a “minor” varies among the states, with most state laws applying to the distribution of harmful material to persons under the age of 18 years but some states prohibiting the distribution of harmful material to those under the age of 17 years.

Harassment/Stalking

All states have statutes prohibiting harassment and stalking. “Harassment” statutes typically prohibit the intentional or knowing engaging in a regular course of conduct (which may include sending mail - including electronic mail - or other written** communications) designed to alarm or seriously annoy another. “Harassment” is sometimes included as a subset of “stalking,” which is defined typically as the willful, malicious, and repeated harassing of another, or the making of a credible threat, with intent to place another in reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. Prohibited “stalking” may directed towards one’s person or one’s family. Threats to property may also be covered.

All states have statutes prohibiting harassment by telephone, although it appears that most of these statutes contemplate voice rather than digital communications. These statutes thus prohibit the use, with intent to harass or annoy, of the telephone: 1) to make obscene or lewd proposals, 2) to threaten to inflict injury, or 3) to call repeatedly, whether or not conversation ensues.

With this general background, what follows is an overview of state obscenity, child pornography, and harassment/stalking laws, as particularly applicable in on-line or digital environments.

* For purpose of state sales and use tax laws, most states regard prewritten computer programs, at least, as tangible personal property. Similarly, most courts that have examined the issue have determined that computer software constitutes “goods” for purposes of Uniform Commercial Code, Article 2. The federal government, on the other hand, has determined computer software to be intangible for tax purposes.

** Many statutes prohibit written communications intended to harass, annoy, or seriously alarm. The issue arises whether digital communications are included within the scope of the statute.

Overview of State Obscenity, Child Pornography, and Harassment Laws

State	Obscenity	Child Pornography	Harassment
Alabama	General statute; prohibits distribution of electrical or electronic reproductions of obscene material	General statute; prohibits distribution of electrical or electronic reproductions of minors engaged in real or simulated sexual activity	General statute; prohibits harassment using any form of written or electronic communication
Alaska	Statute prohibits distribution of obscene or harmful materials to minors	General statute	General statute; prohibits harassment using electronic communications
Arizona	General statute; prohibits any transmission (undefined) of obscene material, whether tangible or intangible	General statute; prohibits the distribution of compact or laser disks, computer diskettes, or tapes portraying minors engaged in sexual activity	General statute; prohibits harassment using electronic communications
Arkansas	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
California	General statute; prohibits electrical reproduction of material showing minors engaged in real or simulated sexual activity	General statute; prohibits the distribution of electronic reproduction of obscene materials to minors	General Statute
Colorado	General statute; limited to distribution of tangible material	General Statute	General Statute
Connecticut	General statute; covers any transmission (undefined) of obscene material; limited to distribution of tangible material	General Statute	General statute; prohibits harassment using computer networks
Delaware	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
D.C.	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
Florida	General Statute	General statute; prohibits the compiling, entering into or transmission by means of a computer, or knowingly causing or allowing the same to occur, of a minor’s name for purposes of offering or soliciting sexual conduct, or the visual depiction of such.	General Statute
Georgia	General Statute	General statute; prohibits electronically furnishing material harmful to minors by way of electronic storage device (e.g., disk or CD-ROM) or allowing access by way of computer bulletin board	General Statute
Hawaii	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
Idaho	General Statute	General statute; prohibits distribution of electronically reproduced material depicting minors engaged in sexual activity	General Statute
Illinois	General Statute	General statute; prohibits computer depiction of minors engaged in actual or simulated sexual activity; prohibits making a depiction of a child engaged in sexual activity available by computer network or by any other means of transferring data to a computer	General Statute
Indiana	General statute; prohibits distribution of electrical reproductions of obscene material	General Statute	General Statute
Iowa	General statute; prohibits distribution of electrical reproductions of obscene material	General statute; excludes from coverage information access service providers that provide mere transmission capacity without control over content	General Statute
Kansas	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
Kentucky	General statute; prohibits distribution of electrical reproductions of obscene material	General Statute	General Statute
Louisiana	General Statute	General statute; prohibits distribution of obscene or harmful materials to minors by means of compact disc, wire or tape recording, or other similar tangible work or thing	General Statute
Maine	General statue; applies to dissemination of obscene material to minors only	General Statute	General Statute
Maryland	General statute; prohibits distribution of electrical reproductions of obscene materials	General statute; prohibits distribution or display of obscene material to minors by way of computer disc or video disc	General Statute
Massachusetts	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
Michigan	General statute; prohibits distribution of obscene materials including any computer tape or any other medium used to electronically reproduce images on a screen	General Statute	General Statute
Minnesota	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
Mississippi	Statute prohibits distribution of obscene or harmful materials to minors	General statute; prohibits causing a child to engage in sexually explicit conduct, or the simulation thereof, by any means including computer for the purpose of creating a visual depiction of such conduct	General Statute
Missouri	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
Montana	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
Nebraska	General statute; prohibits distribution of electrical reproductions of obscene material	General Statute	General Statute
Nevada	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
New Hampshire	General Statute	General Statute	General statute; prohibits harassment using electronic communications
New Jersey	General Statute	General statute; prohibits the knowing possession, sale, manufacture, gift or other transfer of computer programs or video games depicting minor engaged in sexually explicit acts	General Statute
New Mexico	General statute; prohibits distribution of obscene material including computer diskettes, videodisks, or any computer or electronically generated imagery	General Statute	General Statute
New York	General statute; limited to distribution of tangible material	General Statute	General statute; prohibits harassment using electronic means
North Carolina	General Statute	General Statute	General statute; prohibits use of computer modem or facsimile machine to communicate lewd or indecent language or to threaten physical injury
North Dakota	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
Ohio	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
Oklahoma	General statute; prohibits distribution of obscene material including electronic videogames or recordings; prohibits importation of obscene material, including electronic videogames into the state	General statute; prohibits the knowing sale, distribution or display of obscene or harmful materials, including by CD-ROM disk, magnetic disk, or magnetic tape, to minors; prohibits the knowing transmission by computer of obscene or harmful material to minors	General statute; prohibits harassment using electronic means
Oregon	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
Pennsylvania	General Statute	General statute; prohibits using a minor to engage in actual or simulated sex acts, intending such to be depicted on a computer; prohibits the sale or other transfer of any computer depiction of any actual or simulated sexual act by a minor	General Statute
Rhode Island	General statute; limited to distribution of tangible material	General Statute	General statute; prohibits transmission by facsimile machine or other telecommunication device repeatedly to harass or annoy
South Carolina	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
South Dakota	General statute; applies to dissemination of obscene material to minors only	General Statute	General Statute
Tennessee	General statute; prohibits distribution of electrical reproductions of obscene material	General Statute	General Statute
Texas	General statute; limited to distribution of tangible material	General Statute	General Statute
Utah	General statute; prohibits distribution of electrical reproductions, or anything which is or may be used as a means of communication, of obscene material	General Statute	General Statute
Vermont	General statute; applies to dissemination of obscene material to minors only	General Statute	General Statute
Virginia	General Statute	General statute; prohibits use of a minor to make or produce sexually explicit material, including a digital image; prohibits knowingly participating in the reproduction of sexually explicit material by any means, including computer generated reproduction; prohibits use of computers, computer networks, BBS’s or any other electronic means to promote sexually explicit material involving a minor	General Statute
Washington	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
West Virginia	General statute; prohibits distribution of electrical reproductions of obscene material	General Statute	General Statute
Wisconsin	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute
Wyoming	General Statute	General Statute	General Statute

Back to the Index Page at LorenAvedon.com Webhosting

[Notwithstanding]

You are failing to distinguish between adult pornography that is not obsecen(legal in all states) and child pornography (illegal in all states)

Child pornogaphy need not be obscene. Selling photos of a naked child in a bathtub is a child pornography offense.

You also fail to understand that difference here is that the "photographers" here are not inncoently taking photos. Their enterprise is all about encouraging women to undress in public (which is arguably an offense against indecent exposure laws even without the cameras).

---

Child Pornography

All states prohibit child pornography. “Child pornography” may encompass either: 1) the creation or reproduction of materials depicting minors engaged in actual or simulated sexual activity (“Sexual Exploitation of Minors”) or 2) the publication or distribution of obscene, indecent, or harmful materials to minors. All such laws require actual knowledge, or reason to know, that the person portrayed or the recipient of the obscene, indecent, or harmful material is a minor. A few states also penalize the distribution, with reckless disregard, of obscene or indecent materials to minors. The states generally provide defenses to the publisher or distributor where some reasonable attempt has been made to discern the age of the recipient of the obscene, indecent, or harmful material.

As noted above, most state statutes reach beyond what is deemed to be “obscene” for adults to prohibit the distribution of material that has been determined to be “harmful to minors,” including that which is indecent or excessively violent. As with obscenity statutes generally, what is “harmful to minors” is to be determined with reference to the local “community.” Note, too, that the definition of a “minor” varies among the states, with most state laws applying to the distribution of harmful material to persons under the age of 18 years but some states prohibiting the distribution of harmful material to those under the age of 17 years.

[laredo44]

Are you from Australia?

[RightOnline]

"State Attorney Jim Appleman said only about half the footage has been viewed so far and it could take three more weeks to complete the investigation."

Yeah. I'll bet.

[eno_]

It depends on the beahavior - alcohol is 21. Most things are 18, but it varies. And there is nothing unconstitutional about it.

So if I found your behavior undesirable, all I'd have to do is define your demographic in a way that I could write into law that you are not allowed to post on FR?

I'd love to disenfranchise constipated old farts like you. Good you think it would be constitutional.

[Servant of the Nine]

All such laws require actual knowledge, or reason to know, that the person portrayed or the recipient of the obscene, indecent, or harmful material is a minor.

I think the courts will find that asking for photo ID of people in bikinis in a crowd of half a million presumptive adults is unreasonable. This is not kiddy porn, this is 16 and 17 year olds who have been allowed by their guardians to run loose with an adult crowd.

I think this issue is a smoke screen anyway. You simply like the idea of putting people in jail for violating your personal sense of good taste.

So9

[prisoner6]

OK, no pics yet but being a Mardi Gras fan I dug around in my computer for a couple of my favs.

Girls gone wild...sorta...

Wabbits 'n' The Col. Gone Wild...where's PETA?

And for comparison Girls on Spring Break Doing Public Service in Phuket Tailand...sadly this one is FOR REAL!

Seriously I don't agree with the underage thing but then again as old as I am I do remember what it was like to be young and stupid. A very good friend of mine just passed away at 40 years old. Very Pretty blonde gal. Funny, smart, and a pleasure to talk and be with.

Only had one problem.

From whem she was a young adult she loved to flash. I guess it made her day. She'd flash anyone, anywhere. cops, weddings, in restaurants...it made no difference.

Now let me explain. She had a brain anurism when she was young and went downhill after leaving the hospital. Hung out with a guy who beat her...started drinking vodka heavily and started using drugs.

Everybody who knew her loved her and tried to help. Wife and I offered to let her stay with us because often we'd find her sleeping on our front porch.

I got her a job...several actually, her family and others helped as well. But in the end it wasn't enough and one night in February she needed a place to stay, was too embarrased to call me or anyone else, and went home with a girlfriend who was a drug addict.

A couple of days later she died in an apartment over a bar, in the arms of the guy who beat her but she deeply loved. He found out she started taking heroin through her eyes using eyecups.

I don't know if it was the brain problem that started her on flashing. She did it from the first day I met her. And maybe she started taking drugs after getting hooked on pain killers after her very serious operations. But the point is that no matter what anyone did for her she was going to flash. The same thing with booze and drugs and abusive guys.

In the end we all got used to it, even Wife and Kidz...sadly.

I said good-bye to her at her bedside a few hours before she was taken off life support.

You don't know what I'd give to have her here now flashing and all.

In fact I'd probably tell her to "Put 'Em On The Glass", because if she'd catch me in the car that's what she'd do just to tease me even though she knew I didn't like it.

Some girls, go figure.

prisoner6

[Notwithstanding]

Your ignorance is now on display for all to see.

[Notwithstanding]

By the way, you overlook an important detail: the videos include sex, not simply boob-flashing.

---

from the article:

"The mail-order videos feature nudity and sexual activity. The charges include racketeering, procuring minors for sexual acts, filming minors engaged in sexual performances, and conspiracy to commit those offenses.

Francis also is facing drug and lewdness charges."

[eno_]

Really. So your Superior Brain could come up with a short, pithy explanation about how an adult citizen could be denied the right to buy alcohol?

For extra credit, what other rights can an adult be denied, based on age (hint, there is one - it is written into the Constitution)?

Please, sir, display your intelligence.

[Servant of the Nine]

By the way, you overlook an important detail: the videos include sex, not simply boob-flashing.

I have seen the videos.
There are scenes of a couple of girls kissing and groping around on each other, but nothing a 12 year old can't see in a PG rated movie.

The sales hype for the video and the prosecutors self rightious hype of his case are a lot racier than the actuality.

So9

[FITZ]

I will further contend that when a parent allows their under age child to go on spring break they have constructively consented to whatever they may do. There may be a case of Child Neglect to make against the parrent, but there is no rational case against the photographers who documented their actions.

I tend to agree. Any parent who sends an underage girl to a Mardi Gras or a wild spring break beach has absolutely nothing to say when strangers are out filming what their tramps are doing in public. What this seems to me is the parents want everyone to believe their daughters are sweet and innocent, the daughters are just like bitches in heat having sex with anyone who'll have them. It bothers me the taxpayers are supposed to provide all the police protection that these girls need because of trying to sexually entice every man around, they could get raped.

[ikka]

I don't get it. If the acts are taking place in a public area (like bars, hotel swimming pools, etc.) how can they be charged? If the stuff happens inside a private area like a hotel room that is more understandable.

Would I be guilty of "child porn" if I videotaped such an event from the hotel balcony of my room and the events were happening in the publicly visible hotel room?

Why don't they charge the kids or the parents of the kids for their behavior then? Oh that's right, the cops wouldn't look like the good guys then.

[Major_Risktaker]

"The girls were drunk and didn't know what they were doing."

I could say so many things about your statement. However, I'll just let it go.

[peacethroughstrength]

Here again, the model of libertarianism breaks down. Libertarianism is like socialism, they both look good on paper (though polar opposites). Actions have consequences, laws are enforced to protect people from their own ignorance. You can not go through life thinking that you can make up the rules, that is the lowest form of sprirtual reasoning. Propogating and encouraging illicit and immoral behaviour from those not intellectually developed enough to know better (further exacerbated by alcohol) has a negative effect not only on those involved, but on society itself. The excuse of "Well, it goes on anyway, there just happened to be someone there with a camera" is weak and does not excuse it.

[timestax]

I tend to agree. Any parent who sends an underage girl to a Mardi Gras or a wild spring break beach has absolutely nothing to say when strangers are out filming what their tramps are doing in public. What this seems to me is the parents want everyone to believe their daughters are sweet and innocent, the daughters are just like bitches in heat having sex with anyone who'll have them. It bothers me the taxpayers are supposed to provide all the police protection that these girls need because of trying to sexually entice every man around, they could get raped. 52 posted on 05/24/2003 9:09 AM PDT by FITZ [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

DITTO !!

And if somebody does NOT like it (live, or on film) they DON'T HAVE TO WATCH!

[FITZ]

One couple's friends were trying to pull them apart and drag them off - they looked like dogs in heat! They all looked like high school and college kids.

A co-worker of mine let her high-school senior daughter go to a spring break beach a few years back. The daughter came back rather shocked by things she saw --- she told of how the girls (thongs bathing suits of course) eagerly remove their bras to show strangers what they have, the girls would approach the boys and pull down their bathing suits and begin to fondle them. She even took some pictures to show her mom how bad it was. The feminists have taught them well ---they can still of course cry rape when they get what it appears they were begging for. They can sue those taking pictures of what they were doing right in public for all to see.

[Cloud William]

More than 100 criminal warrants have been served against three companies, the creator of the "Girls Gone Wild" video series and a camera operator...

Producer Joe Francis, 30, of Las Vegas, voluntarily appeared Thursday to be processed on 22 charges stemming from his arrest on April 2 with three employees. They were arrested at nearby Panama City Beach, one of the nation's leading spring break destinations, where they were filming videos.

Francis also is facing drug and lewdness charges. A camera operator, Mark D. Schmitz, 26, also is facing similar charges. Both are free on bond.

Also charged are Francis' company, Mantra Films Inc., Aero Falcons LLC and MRA Holding LLC. The companies each face about 20 charges.

Just a few nights ago, I caught part of one of the GGW TV advertisements. I believe it was called "Girls Gone Wild - Doggy Style", or something like that. Prominently featured in the ad was none other than Snoop Dogg himself; he is even shown holding a camcorder.

I wonder when his warrant is going to be served.

[#3Fan]

From the article:

The investigation began after a 16-year-old girl told her parents that she and four friends had been videotaped performing sexual acts at a hotel.

What part of this don't you guys understand? These underage girls were brought to a hotel to be filmed. You're saying that since the girls have bad parents that these perverts should be able to do as they wish to them? Where do you draw the line then? What about 10 years old? You could say "but judge, their parents said I could have sex with them!". You think that would excuse a 30-something from doing a ten-year-old. Society draws the line at 18 no matter how dumb the parents are. Other people's stupidity in no excuse to take sexual advantage of a minor.

SOTN: It was pretty obvious you owned these videos.

[#3Fan]

Should be "...is no excuse..."