Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDoc
From the article:
"However, two producers have had records indicating two performers were underage at the time of filming. According to the identification on record, both were 16 years old on the production date.
Although additional investigation determined both performers were of legal age, it does demonstrate some producers' record-keeping is so poor they could negligently hire an underage performer."
Like they need any other reasons to proceed....
|
Right after that is says
"Although additional investigation determined both performers WERE OF LEGAL AGE, it does demonstrate some producers' record-keeping is so poor they could negligently hire an underage performer."
So they weren't underage, the companies just didn't know how to keep good records.