Quote:
Originally Posted by OneHungLo
Thanks for posting.
What are your thought on the case? I saw Corey Silverstein was quoted in the NYT as saying "The government has a pretty high burden. They have to be able to show that someone knowingly recruited, enticed, harbored and patronized a person and then gained value from it.” He said he was “not convinced the government has a case,” adding, “Was the line crossed from content production to sex trafficking?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/11/u...afficking.html |
I think Corey's wrong. I think he's putting a nice spin on it for the industry.... This wont even go to trial. The govt has testimony under oath from the civil case (deposition and trial) from some of the defendants. They have already incriminated themselves. And I think once the defendants realize they are facing lifetime imprisonment, they will be cutting deals and flipping to testify against Pratt and each other. The attorneys for GDP should have known better to allow their clients to testify and not invoke Fifth Amendment protections. Even the admin assistant has been indicted.
I dont think the GDP attorneys were industry attorneys. I think they were only business litigators. So they probably didnt even think twice about the ramifications of letting their client's testify under oath.
The FBI/DOJ was probably sitting back waiting on the defendants testimony and when they had enough, they indicted them.
I think sex trafficking will be the new weapon against producers... with what they have been charged with, almost any amount of coercion will do... you dont have to kidnap and/or rape models to get there.
And GDP even shot in one of the two states where porn is a protected First Amendment right.