GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - Being Prosecuted for Kiddie Porn Even Though Images are of Adult Performers

- Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)

Being Prosecuted for Kiddie Porn Even Though Images are of Adult Performers

From ********.com -- http://www.********.com/read.php?ID=40543

Can anyone confirm this ? Anyone in Virginia hear about this case ? I havent seen this make any kind of news...

Quote:

John Ervin writes me: Please read ALL of this BEFORE making any decisions.
I am currently fighting 29 counts of child pornography charges in the state
of Virginia.

As of today, 20 of the 29 charges have been dismissed - BECAUSE THEY WERE
CONFIRMED TO BE ADULT PERFORMERS.

9 charges remain, 7 of these have been identified as ADULT performers - even after presenting 18USC2257 releases, and copies of the ID's of the
performers and even sworn written testimony from 1 of them, and copies of current drivers license.

The prosecution will NOT drop these 7 charges.

5 of the photos from an individual from Arizona (currently alive and has
been contacted), 1 photo is from England (dates back to the early 90's) - this is from The Score group in Florida; 1 from an adult actor from Poland - passport is from 1999.. Anna Marek is the stage name.

Subpoena's have been issued for the two companies from Florida, and the
individual from Arizona to come to Virginia to testify.

All three are refusing to come here to testify. It is likely a warrant will
be issued for their arrest, and they be brought here. 2 charges are unknown at this time. I would like to identify the remaining
two charges.

you have a funny law system if thats true

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton (Post 16938607)

you have a funny law system if thats true

No shit, jesus christ! "YOU'RE GUILTY OF CRIMES YOU DIDNT COMMIT LMAO HAVE FUN IN PRISON FAGGOT".

Edit: *Judge praises allegiance to a piece of fabric, spanks his kids for using the lords name in vain, hates homosexuals*

"The prosecution will NOT drop these 7 charges."
wonder why ??:2 cents:

Quote:

Originally Posted by JFK (Post 16938634)

"The prosecution will NOT drop these 7 charges."
wonder why ??:2 cents:

Obviously because they are not a 2257safe customer :2 cents:

Quote:

Originally Posted by JFK (Post 16938634)

"The prosecution will NOT drop these 7 charges."
wonder why ??:2 cents:

there has to be something else to it than this :2 cents:

this is why:

http://trewthe.wordpress.com/2007/09...as-child-porn/

i have heard.. dont know if true or not, but this is very similar scenario to dirty d... (if you believe dirty d didnt know the girl was underage (if she was at the time))

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton (Post 16938607)

you have a funny law system if thats true

It has already come abroad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by marketsmart (Post 16938877)

this is why:

http://trewthe.wordpress.com/2007/09...as-child-porn/

"In 1998, an Internet User known by the alias "Bile", posted thousands of copyrighted COLOR CLIMAX works to Usenet News.

After numerous warnings from the COLOR CLIMAX Legal Department and their outside lawyers, COLOR CLIMAX sued "Bile" in the U.S. District Court in New York.

"Bile's" response was the following:

"You have no idea who you are fucking with. I suggest you take that little lawsuit and run."

The more things change the more they stay the same.:1orglaugh

Quote:

9 charges remain, 7 of these have been identified as ADULT performers - even after presenting 18USC2257 releases, and copies of the ID's of the
performers and even sworn written testimony from 1 of them, and copies of current drivers license.

Is anyone else but me wondering why he explains away all but 2 of these charges? :helpme

Quote:

Originally Posted by PornMD (Post 16938998)

Is anyone else but me wondering why he explains away all but 2 of these charges? :helpme

i'm wondering about the whole story actually.

no wonder. look at some of the names of those titles on one of the sites that blog links to. fucking guy is begging to be prosecuted.

This is really fucked up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by marketsmart (Post 16938877)

Thanks for the link. Interesting read and a lot like Dirty D's case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Ervin

9 charges remain, 7 of these have been identified as ADULT performers - even after presenting 18USC2257 releases, and copies of the ID's of the
performers and even sworn written testimony from 1 of them, and copies of current drivers license.

The prosecution will NOT drop these 7 charges.

Seems like someone doesn't even know how much they are charged with. :2 cents:

This should serve as a very strong reminder to everyone right now to review your 2257 docs and make sure they are in order.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NaughtyVisions (Post 16939425)

Seems like someone doesn't even know how much they are charged with. :2 cents:

No, if you read further, the quote mentions that 7 of those charges are in cases when the performer was clearly adult and he was referring to those 2 charges. My reply was that he conspicuously left out anything about the other 2 charges, which seems rather odd. :helpme

Messed up. But we don't know the full story.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Press Release Pro (Post 16938793)

Obviously because they are not a 2257safe customer :2 cents:

:1orglaugh