Talk about justice porn! "GirlsDoPorn" employees/owners arrested for sex trafficking charges; one owner fled to New Zealand and is considered a fugitive. (politics)

submitted ago by forget-me-not

Obviously, dumb wh*res should have some responsibility and self-respect, but a few cases sounded like genuine deception and coercion. Regardless, it is gratifying to see nasty, exploitative people finally getting screwed over. Lol, one of the employees is a woman. Muh sexual liberation!!!

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/pr/girlsdoporn-owners-and-employees-charged-sex-trafficking-conspiracy

The owners and two employees of the popular adult websites GirlsDoPorn and GirlsDoToys were charged in federal court today with sex trafficking crimes in connection with a scheme to deceive and coerce young women to appear in sex videos.

According to a complaint, owners Michael James Pratt and Matthew Isaac Wolfe along with adult film performer and producer Ruben Andre Garcia and administrative assistant Valorie Moser used deception and false promises to lure the victims, who had responded to ads for modeling jobs that would supposedly pay $5,000. Eventually the women were told the job was really for adult films.

To persuade the women to participate, the defendants convinced them they could remain anonymous and that **their videos would not be posted on the internet.

** In reality, the entire purpose was to post the videos on the internet. According to financial records, the websites have generated more than $17 million in revenue.

Wow, you have to be a really low IQ wh*re to believe that. LOL! I suppose the concept of videos getting on the internet may not have been as obvious back in 2006, but apparently some of this is recent.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7555739/Whistleblower-testifies-against-owner-Girls-Porn-lawsuit.html

In August, the first of the 22 women, who are all identified from Jane Doe 1 to 22, gave testimony at San Diego Superior Court that she responded to a Craigslist advert in 2016. Jane Doe 15 said her video was circulated widely online - despite contractual promises that the recordings was to be distributed on DVD abroad only.

The lawsuit alleges that the company made millions in profits by coercing young women into the scenes, by initially advertising themselves online as a modelling website and lying to them about the conditions of the scenes.

Girls Do Porn, an adult subscription service, started in 2006, by Pratt, of New Zealand. The company trafficked in x-rated videos involving women aged 18-22 and advertised that it was the 'one and only time [the girls] do porn'.

But the 22 women claim Pratt and his associates defrauded and underpaid the women, making false promises about the distribution of the material to victims, many of whom were too young to drink. According to the lawsuit, Jane Doe 15, who was 18 at the time, admitted she consented to the shoots but only on the understanding that the videos would not include any identifying information, and would only be distributed to private collectors abroad.

Despite the understanding, Jane Doe 15 claimed she and the other models later discovered the tapes had been widely distributed online - along with their names, phone numbers and personal information.

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

JimSoddell ago

It's really weird that anyone would do this without thinking that it's completely obvious their family, future employers, and potential boyfriends would all eventually become aware they did this. Or that the videos would remain private or only be sold overseas in obscure markets. But I guess they are just naive. Won't say dumb, young people often are naive to the way the world works and too trusting. Don't trust a porn producer maybe?

What's the trafficking argument here though given it was consensual and they were paid?

Thisismyvoatusername ago

Pretty sure the Mann Act makes it trafficking even if consentual and they get paid as long as they crossed state lines.

JimSoddell ago

Hey thanks, that's helpful.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann_Act

It was amended by Congress in 1978 and again in 1986 to limit its application to transport for the purpose of prostitution or other illegal sexual acts.

Hm, so it would have been a violation of federal law to recruit across state lines before the porn industry became legalized. But the amendments make clear it only applies to illegal acts, which consensual participation as an adult in porn is not.

So it's got to be something else they are arguing. Let's see...

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/pr/girlsdoporn-owners-and-employees-charged-sex-trafficking-conspiracy

Says they were sexually assaulted, raped, and coerced.

Sex Trafficking by Force, Fraud and Coercion, 18 U.S.C. § 1591(a) and (b)(1)

OK so that's it, and you are right about Mann. The sex was illegal because it involved assault, rape and coercion. This then made the crossing of state lines sex trafficking.

If you cross state lines and participate in porn shoots, that's legal. But if they rape you during the shoot, charges can now be federal trafficking charges in addition to the state rape code violations. Neat.

NotHereForPizza ago

These women were, 100%, not coerced.

Sedatedinsomniac ago

But see, they regretted it afterwards and that...like...totally makes it coercion because they...like....felt bad about it when they had to go through all those consequences and stuff....like...it's totally not their fault they did porn because if they knew how it was going to make them feel there's no way they would have taken that money you know so it's totally not their fault and those producers totally coerced them into doing it. That girl whose boyfriend dumped her, he's a total asshole for not understanding....

~Hamsters

Deceneu ago

I guess they may be referring to the contract bein breached, therefore nullified, therefore whatever sex scenes were shoot they were explicitly without consent (in this case with a nullified contract) ?

NotHereForPizza ago

You sound like a lawkike

Deceneu ago

I wish was paid like one. No lawkike here, fellow shape-s... whhhite person.