Bush Stepping up Obscenity Prosecutions - GoFuckYourself.com

Jace · 05-04-2005, 09:49 PM

Since 2001, 40 people and businesses have been convicted and 20 additional indictments are pending

WASHINGTON - Thomas Lambert made no attempt to hide the kind of videos he peddled from his Montana home - hard-core sex tapes involving bestiality, sadomasochism and simulated rape.

The 65-year-old former schoolteacher had little reason to believe he could get in trouble. He was selling tapes to adults who wanted them and there had not been a federal obscenity prosecution in Montana in at least 16 years, according to his lawyer, Mark Errebo.

But Lambert and co-defendant Sanford Wasserman were charged last spring with violating federal obscenity statutes. In pleading guilty, they joined a growing number of purveyors of pornography whom the Bush administration has pursued.

Since 2001, 40 people and businesses have been convicted and 20 additional indictments are pending, said Andrew Oosterbaan, chief of the Justice Department's child exploitation and obscenity section. By comparison, there were four such prosecutions during the eight years of the Clinton administration, he said.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, like his immediate predecessor, John Ashcroft, has pledged to make obscenity prosecutions a priority. The department is expected to announce soon the creation of a special unit within its criminal division to focus on adult obscenity cases.

"Enforcement is absolutely necessary if we are going to protect citizens from unwanted exposure to obscene materials," Gonzales recently told federal prosecutors. He directed U.S. attorneys to report back by late July on effective ways to crack down on obscenity and what tools the prosecutors might need.

Those kind of words please religious conservatives, who claim the Clinton administration virtually ignored the proliferation of pornography, particularly on the Internet, during the 1990s.

Critics say a few dozen criminal cases will not dent an industry with an estimated $10 billion a year in sales. Moreover, they say, the effort is an assault on the First Amendment protection of speech and expression, however distasteful.

"They'll find some sacrificial victims, but the porn industry will go on," said Marjorie Heins, founder of the Free Expression Policy Project at New York University's Brennan Center for Justice.

A proponent of strict enforcement of obscenity laws agreed with Heins that so far, the administration has aimed mostly at minor figures in the industry.

"At some point, they're going to have to ratchet it up if they want to do something meaningful," said Robert Peters, president of Morality in Media.

Oosterbaan said the government has won convictions in high-profile cases. He cited a guilty plea last year from John Coil of Highland Village, Texas, who owned and operated 27 adult-oriented businesses in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona. Coil forfeited an estimated $8.1 million in property to the government and was sentenced to more than five years in prison.

In addition, there is the 23-count indictment against Edward Wedelstedt of Littleton, Colo., and his Goalie Entertainment Holdings Inc. Wedelstedt owns pornographic bookstores in 18 states; the indictment lists six allegedly obscene videos and DVDs.

The government is seeking the forfeiture of millions of dollars in real estate and other property, including a Lear jet, in the Wedelstedt case.

Henry W. Asbill of Washington, Wedelstedt's lawyer, said the indictment was politically motivated.

"My client supplies his own stores with adult materials that are for adults only. Consenting adults come into the stores and view or rent or buy the movies," Asbill said.

In trying to prosecute obscenity, it long has been difficult to distinguish obscenity from indecent content. As former Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart once famously said about hard-core pornography, "I know it when I see it."

The Supreme Court has ruled that many dirty pictures are constitutionally protected free speech that adults have the right to see and buy. The high court also has rebuffed Congress' attempts to ban or restrict adult-oriented Web sites.

But the court also set out ground rules for obscenity in its landmark 1973 ruling in Miller v. California that allow the standards for offending material to vary from one community to the next.

The Justice Department's approach has been to identify videos that even some in the pornography business find unappealing and to bring charges in more socially conservatives places, where possible.

In the Montana case, Lambert distributed videos that even his lawyer said were "frankly, disgusting."

In the case against Wedelstedt, the government filed charges in Dallas, where the Colorado resident was indicted.

But a recent court decision in Pittsburgh could upset the administration's plans. U.S. District Judge Gary Lancaster tossed out an obscenity indictment against Extreme Associates Inc. and its owners, Robert Zicari, and his wife, Janet Romano, both of Northridge, Calif.

Lancaster ruled that prosecutors overstepped their bounds while trying to block the company's hard-core movies from children and from adults who did not want to see such material. He said the company can market and distribute its materials because people have a right to view them in the privacy of their own homes.

Tango · 05-04-2005, 09:53 PM

where is this from?
what date?

Wizzo · 05-05-2005, 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tango

where is this from?
what date?

Off the wire, today... Saw it on the news this morning...

Harmon · 05-05-2005, 05:22 AM

"Thomas Lambert made no attempt to hide the kind of videos he peddled from his Montana home - hard-core sex tapes involving bestiality, sadomasochism and simulated rape."

Ummm...

Manowar · 05-05-2005, 05:31 AM

no surprise if he was doing beast and sim. rape

v4 media · 05-05-2005, 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manowar

no surprise if he was doing beast and sim. rape

Yep go after all of them first, should take a few years..

ADL Colin · 05-05-2005, 05:59 AM

POOR JOURNALISM.

It is not true that there were only 4 such cases under Clinton in 8 years.

For example: "In fiscal year 1997, there were only six prosecutions in which the lead charge was a violation of federal obscenity laws. In fiscal year 1998, the number was eight." That's 14 in 2 years right there.

SOURCE: http://www.moralityinmedia.org/index...lintonporn.htm

Here are the press releases releated to the "40 prosecutions"
http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/ceos/pressreleases.html

Almost all child porn and sex traficking with the exceptions mentioned in the article (bestiality, simulated rape, tax evasion). I personally don't agree with prosecutions for bestiality and simulated rape but my point is that the reality is quite different than that portrayed in this article and the article is just flat our wrong on some points.

12clicks · 05-05-2005, 06:06 AM

god damn, this sky is taking a long time to fall.

Adult Site Traffic · 05-05-2005, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manowar

no surprise if he was doing beast and sim. rape

No shit.

I guess my shaved pink shots and ass plundering vids are still a pretty safe bet

Pimpimp

.

who · 05-05-2005, 06:30 AM

Interesting how they refer to Bush as 'The Bush Administration' all the time now...They never had to do that with any of the good presidents.

Adult Site Traffic · 05-05-2005, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .?.

Interesting how they refer to Bush as 'The Bush Administration' all the time now...They never had to do that with any of the good presidents.

Ah hahahaha ha. SO true !

.

12clicks · 05-05-2005, 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .?.

Interesting how they refer to Bush as 'The Bush Administration' all the time now...They never had to do that with any of the good presidents.

I'm betting you're not old enough to remember the last administration.

MandyBlake · 05-05-2005, 07:10 AM

i would love it if they put some clear, precise definition to obscenity. that would make everything so much eaiser.

Redrob · 05-05-2005, 07:12 AM

As the DOJ is under mandate from Congress to report the number of obscenity prosecutions, there will be some action in the foreseeable future. I don't think that Attorney General Gonzales wants to report "no action" to Congress. With these Christo-nazi Republicans in charge of Congress, he would probably take a hit and loose his job. And, that looks bad on your resume when you apply for dogcatcher.

pstation · 05-05-2005, 07:15 AM

awesome news

can't wait till they start cracking down on hardcore porn

Tango · 05-05-2005, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pstation

awesome news

can't wait till they start cracking down on hardcore porn

I hope your joking - hardcore legal porn - I see no problems
the Illegal stuff - ya of course - no brainer

ProjectNaked · 05-05-2005, 07:53 AM

That's a good read...looks like a few people may want to "clean up" their businesses...it would suck to wake up and find out your a government target.

Pleasurepays · 05-05-2005, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harmon

"Thomas Lambert made no attempt to hide the kind of videos he peddled from his Montana home - hard-core sex tapes involving bestiality, sadomasochism and simulated rape."

Ummm...

sounds like he deserves to be in jail

Rebecca Love · 05-05-2005, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12clicks

god damn, this sky is taking a long time to fall.

There is a whole lot of sky, give it time......

cherrylula · 05-05-2005, 08:05 AM

damn, so much for herfirstdogdick.com

vicki · 05-05-2005, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MandyBlake

i would love it if they put some clear, precise definition to obscenity. that would make everything so much eaiser.

this is all we have so far:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...g/cambria.html

ADL Colin · 05-12-2005, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .?.

Interesting how they refer to Bush as 'The Bush Administration' all the time now...They never had to do that with any of the good presidents.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...&bt nG=Search

Results 1 - 10 of about 2,240,000 for "clinton administration". (0.06 seconds)

latinasojourn · 05-12-2005, 09:18 AM

mainstream porn, the type the ordinary member of a grand jury can walk into his small town video store and rent, and take home and watch (ordinary fucking and sucking) will not be convictable in the usa.

but listen carefully now; VERY CAREFULLY.

you are AT RISK if you are a purveyor of rough sex, degrading sex, excrement sex, or anything that "appears" non-consensual.

even if all parties are adults, and no matter how many model releases you hold.

i'm not going to say these items are convictable, i'm saying you are at risk.

because when the DOJ comes knocking on your door you have lost---whether or not you win or lose in court.

GatorB · 05-12-2005, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaceXXX

[size=+2]"Enforcement is absolutely necessary if we are going to protect citizens from unwanted exposure to obscene materials," Gonzales recently told federal prosecutors. He directed U.S. attorneys to report back by late July on effective ways to crack down on obscenity and what tools the prosecutors might need.

If people don't want to be exposed to these materials my I suggest not typing WOMEN FUCKING DOGS over at Google then. Meanwhile somewhere a terrorist is building a dirty bomb while the AG is looking for porn pedlers.

nojob · 05-12-2005, 09:25 AM

We need a good advocate for the industry.

chadglni · 05-12-2005, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Almighty Colin

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&l...&bt nG=Search

Results 1 - 10 of about 2,240,000 for "clinton administration". (0.06 seconds)

Wow, that's amazing.

Results 1 - 10 of about 29,200,000 for bush administration. (0.08 seconds)

My math may be off but that looks like way the fuck more no?

12clicks · 05-12-2005, 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .?.

Interesting how they refer to Bush as 'The Bush Administration' all the time now...They never had to do that with any of the good presidents.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adult Site Traffic

Ah hahahaha ha. SO true !

Results 1 - 10 of about 2,240,000 for "clinton administration".
Results 1 - 10 of about 29,200,000 for bush administration.

The rabble truly have no shame. They'll just move on to the next subject like this one never existed.

directfiesta · 05-12-2005, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by latinasojourn

mainstream porn, the type the ordinary member of a grand jury can walk into his small town video store and rent, and take home and watch (ordinary fucking and sucking) will not be convictable in the usa.

but listen carefully now; VERY CAREFULLY.

you are AT RISK if you are a purveyor of rough sex, degrading sex, excrement sex, or anything that "appears" non-consensual.

even if all parties are adults, and no matter how many model releases you hold.

i'm not going to say these items are convictable, i'm saying you are at risk.

because when the DOJ comes knocking on your door you have lost---whether or not you win or lose in court.

quite exact.

GatorB · 05-12-2005, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .?.

Interesting how they refer to Bush as 'The Bush Administration' all the time now...They never had to do that with any of the good presidents.

They've always heard "administration" I'm 36 and I can remember hearing that since Ford. Maybe "Bush Administration" get more results because

A) Bush is the CURRENT administration.

B) Clinton's first term was over before google even existed.

C) There have been 2 Bush administrations.

nico-t · 05-12-2005, 11:21 AM

everybody knows bush is the stupid puppet of the real leaders behind the scenes............ and they can fuck up all they want since only bush takes the heat for all the retarded shit they did

Major (Tom) · 05-12-2005, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by latinasojourn

mainstream porn, the type the ordinary member of a grand jury can walk into his small town video store and rent, and take home and watch (ordinary fucking and sucking) will not be convictable in the usa.

but listen carefully now; VERY CAREFULLY.

you are AT RISK if you are a purveyor of rough sex, degrading sex, excrement sex, or anything that "appears" non-consensual.

even if all parties are adults, and no matter how many model releases you hold.

i'm not going to say these items are convictable, i'm saying you are at risk.

because when the DOJ comes knocking on your door you have lost---whether or not you win or lose in court.

Everyone is at risk. But I agree, the good stuff is at higher risk.

Duke

12clicks · 05-12-2005, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nico-t

everybody knows bush is the stupid puppet of the real leaders behind the scenes............ and they can fuck up all they want since only bush takes the heat for all the retarded shit they did

oooohhh, who are the "real leaders"?
enlighten us.

05-04-2005, 09:49 PM	#1
Jace FBOP Class Of 2013 Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: bumfuck, ky Posts: 35,562	Bush Stepping up Obscenity Prosecutions Since 2001, 40 people and businesses have been convicted and 20 additional indictments are pending WASHINGTON - Thomas Lambert made no attempt to hide the kind of videos he peddled from his Montana home - hard-core sex tapes involving bestiality, sadomasochism and simulated rape. The 65-year-old former schoolteacher had little reason to believe he could get in trouble. He was selling tapes to adults who wanted them and there had not been a federal obscenity prosecution in Montana in at least 16 years, according to his lawyer, Mark Errebo. But Lambert and co-defendant Sanford Wasserman were charged last spring with violating federal obscenity statutes. In pleading guilty, they joined a growing number of purveyors of pornography whom the Bush administration has pursued. Since 2001, 40 people and businesses have been convicted and 20 additional indictments are pending, said Andrew Oosterbaan, chief of the Justice Department's child exploitation and obscenity section. By comparison, there were four such prosecutions during the eight years of the Clinton administration, he said. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, like his immediate predecessor, John Ashcroft, has pledged to make obscenity prosecutions a priority. The department is expected to announce soon the creation of a special unit within its criminal division to focus on adult obscenity cases. "Enforcement is absolutely necessary if we are going to protect citizens from unwanted exposure to obscene materials," Gonzales recently told federal prosecutors. He directed U.S. attorneys to report back by late July on effective ways to crack down on obscenity and what tools the prosecutors might need. Those kind of words please religious conservatives, who claim the Clinton administration virtually ignored the proliferation of pornography, particularly on the Internet, during the 1990s. Critics say a few dozen criminal cases will not dent an industry with an estimated $10 billion a year in sales. Moreover, they say, the effort is an assault on the First Amendment protection of speech and expression, however distasteful. "They'll find some sacrificial victims, but the porn industry will go on," said Marjorie Heins, founder of the Free Expression Policy Project at New York University's Brennan Center for Justice. A proponent of strict enforcement of obscenity laws agreed with Heins that so far, the administration has aimed mostly at minor figures in the industry. "At some point, they're going to have to ratchet it up if they want to do something meaningful," said Robert Peters, president of Morality in Media. Oosterbaan said the government has won convictions in high-profile cases. He cited a guilty plea last year from John Coil of Highland Village, Texas, who owned and operated 27 adult-oriented businesses in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona. Coil forfeited an estimated $8.1 million in property to the government and was sentenced to more than five years in prison. In addition, there is the 23-count indictment against Edward Wedelstedt of Littleton, Colo., and his Goalie Entertainment Holdings Inc. Wedelstedt owns pornographic bookstores in 18 states; the indictment lists six allegedly obscene videos and DVDs. The government is seeking the forfeiture of millions of dollars in real estate and other property, including a Lear jet, in the Wedelstedt case. Henry W. Asbill of Washington, Wedelstedt's lawyer, said the indictment was politically motivated. "My client supplies his own stores with adult materials that are for adults only. Consenting adults come into the stores and view or rent or buy the movies," Asbill said. In trying to prosecute obscenity, it long has been difficult to distinguish obscenity from indecent content. As former Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart once famously said about hard-core pornography, "I know it when I see it." The Supreme Court has ruled that many dirty pictures are constitutionally protected free speech that adults have the right to see and buy. The high court also has rebuffed Congress' attempts to ban or restrict adult-oriented Web sites. But the court also set out ground rules for obscenity in its landmark 1973 ruling in Miller v. California that allow the standards for offending material to vary from one community to the next. The Justice Department's approach has been to identify videos that even some in the pornography business find unappealing and to bring charges in more socially conservatives places, where possible. In the Montana case, Lambert distributed videos that even his lawyer said were "frankly, disgusting." In the case against Wedelstedt, the government filed charges in Dallas, where the Colorado resident was indicted. But a recent court decision in Pittsburgh could upset the administration's plans. U.S. District Judge Gary Lancaster tossed out an obscenity indictment against Extreme Associates Inc. and its owners, Robert Zicari, and his wife, Janet Romano, both of Northridge, Calif. Lancaster ruled that prosecutors overstepped their bounds while trying to block the company's hard-core movies from children and from adults who did not want to see such material. He said the company can market and distribute its materials because people have a right to view them in the privacy of their own homes.

05-04-2005, 09:53 PM	#2
Tango Let's Tango! Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,570	where is this from? what date? __________________ ADULTS.com / ADULTS.net for sale AFFILIATE.com also for sale Serious Inquiries Only: Email: [email protected] for offers

05-05-2005, 05:22 AM	#4
Harmon ( ͡ʘ╭͜ʖ╮͡ʘ) Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 20,010	"Thomas Lambert made no attempt to hide the kind of videos he peddled from his Montana home - hard-core sex tapes involving bestiality, sadomasochism and simulated rape." Ummm... __________________ [email protected]

05-05-2005, 05:59 AM	#7
ADL Colin Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Tube Titans, USA Posts: 11,929	POOR JOURNALISM. It is not true that there were only 4 such cases under Clinton in 8 years. For example: "In fiscal year 1997, there were only six prosecutions in which the lead charge was a violation of federal obscenity laws. In fiscal year 1998, the number was eight." That's 14 in 2 years right there. SOURCE: http://www.moralityinmedia.org/index...lintonporn.htm Here are the press releases releated to the "40 prosecutions" http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/ceos/pressreleases.html Almost all child porn and sex traficking with the exceptions mentioned in the article (bestiality, simulated rape, tax evasion). I personally don't agree with prosecutions for bestiality and simulated rape but my point is that the reality is quite different than that portrayed in this article and the article is just flat our wrong on some points. __________________ Adult Date Link - $50 PPS starting NOW! -- good and JUICY! skype = "adultdatelink" Last edited by ADL Colin; 05-05-2005 at 06:00 AM..

05-05-2005, 06:06 AM	#8
12clicks Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: God's right hand Posts: 19,788	god damn, this sky is taking a long time to fall. __________________ I'm not a dinosaur, I'm a crocodile. I've seen dinosaurs come and go and I'm left unimpressed.

05-05-2005, 05:31 AM	#5
Manowar jellyfish Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 71,528	no surprise if he was doing beast and sim. rape

05-05-2005, 06:30 AM	#10
who So Fucking Banned Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: ICQ #23642053 Posts: 19,593	Interesting how they refer to Bush as 'The Bush Administration' all the time now...They never had to do that with any of the good presidents.

05-05-2005, 07:10 AM	#13
MandyBlake The one and only! Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 17,761	i would love it if they put some clear, precise definition to obscenity. that would make everything so much eaiser. __________________ Mandy's Playhouse Her First Fat Girl If you're interested in promoting my sites, ICQ me! 178411921

05-05-2005, 07:12 AM	#14
Redrob Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: In a refrigerator box by the tracks. Posts: 4,791	As the DOJ is under mandate from Congress to report the number of obscenity prosecutions, there will be some action in the foreseeable future. I don't think that Attorney General Gonzales wants to report "no action" to Congress. With these Christo-nazi Republicans in charge of Congress, he would probably take a hit and loose his job. And, that looks bad on your resume when you apply for dogcatcher.

05-05-2005, 07:15 AM	#15
pstation Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: chicago Posts: 1,135	awesome news can't wait till they start cracking down on hardcore porn

05-05-2005, 07:53 AM	#17
ProjectNaked Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Detroit Areola Posts: 4,309	That's a good read...looks like a few people may want to "clean up" their businesses...it would suck to wake up and find out your a government target.

05-05-2005, 08:05 AM	#20
cherrylula lol Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 15,969	damn, so much for herfirstdogdick.com

05-12-2005, 09:18 AM	#23
latinasojourn Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 3,191	mainstream porn, the type the ordinary member of a grand jury can walk into his small town video store and rent, and take home and watch (ordinary fucking and sucking) will not be convictable in the usa. but listen carefully now; VERY CAREFULLY. you are AT RISK if you are a purveyor of rough sex, degrading sex, excrement sex, or anything that "appears" non-consensual. even if all parties are adults, and no matter how many model releases you hold. i'm not going to say these items are convictable, i'm saying you are at risk. because when the DOJ comes knocking on your door you have lost---whether or not you win or lose in court.

05-12-2005, 09:25 AM	#25
nojob The Original NoJob Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Jerzzey Posts: 3,682	We need a good advocate for the industry.

05-12-2005, 11:21 AM	#30
nico-t emperor of my world Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: nethalands Posts: 29,903	everybody knows bush is the stupid puppet of the real leaders behind the scenes............ and they can fuck up all they want since only bush takes the heat for all the retarded shit they did