Quote:
Originally Posted by bausch
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.
|
see i don't see how you could come to this conclusion the only way in which
1. the ids were valid
2. they could have been 16 at the time of production
3. and further investigation determined both performers were of legal age
would be if the production date on file was miss marked by 2 years.
nothing about that circumstance demonstrates that they could negligently hire an underage performer since at the time of shoot they would have/did do the math correctly.