Lawyers: It's a "joke"
Lawyers for the adult-entertainment industry call the audits thinly disguised
harassment.
"The whole thing is a joke, which is what aggravates the industry," said Clyde
DeWitt, a lawyer who specializes in adult- entertainment cases with Weston,
Garrou, DeWitt & Walters. "It's designed to harass people who make this
kind of movie so the FBI can snoop around and learn about them. It's an end run
around obscenity laws."
DeWitt said the industry polices itself rigorously, knowing that a conviction
for employing anyone under 18 carries a minimum 15-year federal prison
sentence.
Steve Orenstein, president and owner of Wicked Pictures, said he found
satisfaction in having the FBI investigate his company and issue no citations.
"It's easier to sleep at night knowing what we're doing is right," he said.
Orenstein said agents conducted the inspection in a professional manner, but
that the record-keeping remains a chore.
"It's just an additional source of time, energy and money," he said.
Two big cases
Meanwhile, two cases are testing the parameters of obscenity.
Extreme Associates and Rob Black, the president and CEO of the Canoga
Park-based company, were charged by federal prosecutors in August 2003 with
distributing online obscenity, mail-order obscenity and mail fraud.
A central element in the case is determining the community standard that should
be applied by a jury to determine whether material is obscene. The defendants
want the Internet declared the community standard.
"That would be groundbreaking," said Jennifer Kinsley, an attorney with the
Cincinnati firm of Sirkin, Pinales & Schwartz, the law firm defending
Extreme Associates.
In a second case, a grand jury in Phoenix indicted several individuals and
companies, including JM Productions in Chatsworth, on obscenity charges after
an FBI sting netted videos made by JM. A federal jury would have to make the
actual finding of obscenity at a trial slated for July 10.
Santa Monica attorney Jeffrey J. Douglas, representing an Arizona defendant in
the case, said an obscenity trial over commercially produced adult porn raises
broad First Amendment and community-standard questions.
Obscenity long has been tested against whether it lacks scientific, artistic or
political value; appeals to prurient interest; or offends community standards.
But Douglas said that with the advent of the Internet, it has become virtually
impossible for communities to limit porn by restricting adult-entertainment
retailers.
"The more judges rule that what is available on the Internet is part of the
community, prosecutors face the daunting proposition that there are many other
Web sites with content that's much, much worse," he said.
Dean Boyd, US Justice Department spokesman, said as of February, there had been
52 obscenity convictions nationwide since 2001. The DOJ has obscenity
indictments pending against 17 people or entities.
"The Justice Department continues to make the prosecution of adult obscenity a
priority," Boyd said in a statement.
In 2005, the department established the Obscenity Prosecution Task Force, which
became fully operational in January 2006.
"The task force's singular focus is the prosecution of adult obscenity as it
has been defined by the Supreme Court and related offenses, such as
record-keeping offenses, designed to make sure that children are not used in
the production of sexually explicit material," Boyd said in the statement.
Local law enforcement, meanwhile, is part of the federal task force but no
longer has a leading role.
LAPD's role
The Los Angeles Police Department played a key role in criminal prosecutions
until the mid-1980s, when the California Supreme Court ruled that police cannot
arrest producers on pandering charges for paying for on-film sex performances.
"(The court) felt that sexual activity being filmed and being compensated for a
commercial film was not the same as a pimp on the street providing his girls
for a service, and then taking his cut of the money," said Detective Steve
Takeshita, who oversees the LAPD's four-member porn unit.
"Because of that, the porno industry or any other person who wants to film a
film can do that as long as they abide by the rules and regulations set forth
either by the county or the municipality that they're filming in."
In the city, that means paying $450 per movie shoot to Film LA, which
coordinates city permits required for filming. Adult filming is treated exactly
like other movies, except that any nudity or sexual activity during the shoot
cannot be visible to the public.
It's difficult to estimate how many of the 7,000 or so new porn titles every
year are filmed in the Valley.
A review of thousands of film permits issued over a three-month period found
more than 50 for adult films at locations ranging from remote homes sequestered
by overgrown bushes to multimillion-dollar gated mansions.
"Obscenity is a difficult subject to explain," Takeshita said. "There's no
black and white that is considered illegal or legal."
There also aren't enough investigators to evaluate all the items in the porn
market.
"Just because a product is being distributed and not being prosecuted,"
Takeshita said, "doesn't mean it's a fine product."
Part
V: Porn 'forces you to grow up' |
Part VII: Porn's royal couple
DailyNews.com
