tuscl

D.C. Jury to Watch Porn

Monday, July 12, 2010 7:33 PM
D.C. jury will judge his films for obscenity In a 1964 ruling, Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart famously wrote that while “hard-core pornography” was difficult to define, “I know it when I see it.” And pretty soon, a D.C. jury will be seeing it. The federal trial against John Stagliano of Evil Angel Productions on multiple obscenity counts begins Tuesday. Jurors will have to view two of Evil Angel's films and a trailer for a third. Jamin Raskin of American University's law school, quoted by the Washington Examiner, calls the trial “kind of a jury-based movie review. The jury becomes a little focus group on how shocked, scandalized and grossed out people are.” David Hudson of the First Amendment Center says the case could be significant, since Stagliano's films are not known for being on the extremes of adult fare. Rather, they're pretty standard stuff by pay-per-view and instant download standards. Raskin observes that at one time, “Playboy” magazine was considered outside the norm, but now many see it as mainstream. Still, Stagliano faces up to 32 years in prison, while Evil Angel could be fined up to $7 million for mail and Internet distribution of pornography. The case is rooted in a 1973 Supreme Court ruling that allowed community, not national, standards for defining obscenity -- what's dirty is Salt Lake City might not be in San Francisco. Stagliano, a UCLA graduate who once considered becoming a professor of economics, argues that the ruling does not make sense in the Internet age, since porn films are no longer viewable only in movie theaters. He says the framers of the Constitution wisely knew that the “rights of a minority, and especially the most important minority, the individual, needed to be protected against the will of the majority.” [view link] Mon, Jul 12, 2010

18 comments

  • georgmicrodong
    •
    14 years ago
    "Community standards" is just a way to make "censorship" sound noble. "But what about the *children*?" Keep your kids away from it, asshole, and trying to tell *me* what to do.
  • arbeeguy
    •
    14 years ago
    Do I have this right? Someone can makes a porn movie in LA, and a jury in SALT LAKE CITY can decide if a crime was committed because THEIR community values are violated? I can't believe that would stand up to appeal. Makes no sense. I could see Salt Lake City bringing charges against the theater who was showing the movie, but not against the people who MADE the movie. Am I missing something here?
  • samsung1
    •
    14 years ago
    Also a random tidbit of info about this guy (John Stagliano aka Buttman) is that he tested positive with HIV and believes it was when he was in Brazil with a transsexual [view link] ""I've been f---ed in the ass before," says John. "I wanted to try it again. I'm not a conservative person. If there's something I want to do, I do it." Stagliano says he had "a death wish that evening." He felt obsessed with creating a situation where he "made an irresponsible choice."
  • CTQWERTY
    •
    14 years ago
    Where's Steve229 for that jury duty???
  • georgmicrodong
    •
    14 years ago
    Arbeeguy, yeah because by allowing it to be distributed in their jurisdiction, he violated their laws. Just a way to make an end run around the 1st Amendment.
  • Dudester
    •
    14 years ago
    Arbeeguy wrote: Am I missing something here? The feds, back in the 1970's started their first "community standards" prosecutions. This started, because before there were multi screen megaplexes, there were just local theaters with one screen. In order to try to serve everyone, theaters divided up the week. Wekends were for family films, Rated R movies were seen Tuesday thru Thursday nights and Monday was X rated day. Local worship groups had a problem with Mondays. This is where the prosecutions atarted. As the decade turned, megaplexes started popping up, so the point became moot. The Reagan administration then tried outright to kill porn, but the quick proliferation of home video sales quickly created the cultural norm that porn wasn't perverse. So, the feds went in a different direction. Child porn was BIG business before it was outlawed in 1978. However, several photographers were cashing in with non erotic pictures of naked kids. In 1991, the feds went after photographer Jock Sturges in San Francisco. The jury, however, sided with Sturges and not only aquitted him, but ordered them to return everything they had taken from him. The feds then stepped back from porn prosecutions for awhile. Max Hardcore was successfully prosecuted after 9/11, but he had a hard time validating artistic intent when his flicks were clearly misogynist. The next prosecution was against the creator of "Rape videos" where the actress was actually beaten (broken bones, etc.). However, because the case was tried in Los Angeles, like the Sturges case, it blew up in the face of the feds. A D.C. jury should be an interesting test case. D.C. is predominantly black and evil angel has both black and white actresses. The case will fall on whether a jury will think that porn is obscene (evil angel is nowhere like max hardcore).
  • samsung1
    •
    14 years ago
    Extreme Associates is another porn studio that was busted a while ago for obscenity . Extreme Associates and their DVDs were promoted by the documentary "Confessions of a Porn Addict" because those were some of his favorite films. from wikipedia: Zicari remained in business during the trial; he continued to market and sell the five tapes that are at the center of the prosecution as The Federal Five, with a portion of the sales price going to his defense fund. Note that buyers of those materials do not break the law, since mere possession of obscenity (unlike production and distribution) is not illegal. The involved movies are Extreme Teen 24[1]: contains a scene of a naive supposed young girl being talked into having sex by an older man. The actress involved was over 18, however dressed and acted like a young girl.[7] Cocktails 2[1]: various scenes of women drinking vomit, saliva and other bodily fluids.[15] It was the director's cut version of the film that was cited in the case.[1] Ass Clowns 3: a female journalist is being raped by a gang led by Osama bin Laden; the journalist is freed and the gang members killed. The director's cut version also contains a scene where Jesus steps off the cross and has sex with an angel. 1001 Ways to Eat My Jizz: Forced Entry[14]: The film depicts the beating, rape and murder of women by a serial killer, who is eventually killed by a mob of vigilantes.[14] There are three scenes which graphically portray rape and murder, and women are also spat on.[7] Extreme's website called it their "most controversial movie" and "a stunningly disturbing look at a serial killer, satanic rituals, and the depths of human depravity."[14] Forced Entry was directed by Lizzy Borden and released in 2002. Again it was the director's cut version of the film that was cited in the case.[1]
  • deogol
    •
    14 years ago
    Wow.
  • samsung1
    •
    14 years ago
    Maybe steve229 did have jury duty with this because just read that Feds lost their case against him - 1st in over 30 years.
  • steve229
    •
    14 years ago
    CT/Sam, lol. I wonder what kind of questions they asked during jury selection?
  • MisterGuy
    •
    14 years ago
    What movies did they have to see?
  • SnakePlissken
    •
    14 years ago
    Glad to see a victory for individual rights!
  • samsung1
    •
    14 years ago
    MG, the jury never did end up watching the porn because the judge dismissed the case. The movies in question were DVDs Milk Nymphos and Storm Squirters 2: Target Practice, and trailer for Fetish Fanatic Chapter 5,
  • MisterGuy
    •
    14 years ago
    Thanx for the info. Here's what I could find on the Internet about these movies: "Milk Nymphos" seems to deal with a lot of...you guessed it...milk & cream going into & out of various orifices. [view link] [view link] and [view link] (I like the "blowjob bib" punishment...lol...) [view link] [view link] "Fetish Fanatic Chapter 5" appears to be a Belladonna directed flick that involves a lot of ass-play...fisting, footing (is that a word?), deep-throating, ass-to-mouth, etc.. [view link] I could find much about "Storm Squirters 2: Target Practice", but it obviously sounds like a female squirting flick to me. I'm sure Michael Steele will be showing all of these movies at his next big GOP fundraiser...lol... ;)
  • samsung1
    •
    14 years ago
    interesting MG, thanks for the links
  • samsung1
    •
    14 years ago
    Another obscenity lawsuit: (Jul 23rd, 2010 ) Adult DVD Empire to Plead to One Obscenity Count [view link] WARRENDALE, Pa.—According to documents filed yesterday in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Adult DVD Empire, under its corporate name, Right Ascension, Inc., has been charged with "Mailing Obscene Matters," based on an FBI postal sting carried out "on or about May 29, 2007"—and will plead guilty to that count within the next few days. According to informed sources, Right Ascension was made aware of its possible indictment more than a year ago, when FBI agents raided the company's warehouses in Warrendale and likely seized copies of the DVDs charged in this case: A Bounty of Pain, Shattering Krystal (both from Dan Hawke Productions), Extreme Tit Torture 18 and Pussy Torture 8 (both from Galaxy Entertainment). While no information on the raid was made available at the time, the course of the case suggests that there have been ongoing talks between the company and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), possibly represented by Robert S. Cessar, Acting U.S. Attorney for the Western District since the resignation of Mary Beth Buchanan. The case itself would have been begun during Buchanan's tenure.
  • MisterGuy
    •
    14 years ago
    This latest article screams of plea deal, which is too bad. "Extreme Tit Torture 18": [view link] Ouch...I always laugh when I hear these kind of titles. "It's not just tit torture...it's *extreme* tit torture!" LOL... "Pussy Torture 8": [view link] "Shattering Krystal": [view link] Ouch again, but nice tits there Krystal! No "A Bounty of Pain" stuff apparently around though...
  • troop
    •
    14 years ago
    1st time i've even entered this thread.. lol anyway.. storm squirters 2.. [view link]
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion