4 Women Sue 'Girls Gone Wild' Founder Joe Francis for Underage Filming

Billnew

Legend
Apr 23, 2004
21,246
1,234
58
Ohio
Visit site
✟35,363.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Four additional women sued him last week alleging he exploited them. They say they were 17, 16, 15 and 13 when the company solicited them to participate in sexually provocative videos in 2003 and earlier. They want unspecified monetary damages.

This should be an easy case.
If the company got pictures of their Id, then the case is
worthless, becasue they misrepresented themselves. If they didn't ask for Id, then the girls should get paid what ever they ask. Kiddy inappropriate content is illegal, and he should have spent more time in jail, with as many kids were filmed. Also providing alcohol to minors is a crime too.

If he checked and copied ID, he should have never spent time in jail. He checked for age and they provided fraudulent documentation.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,341430,00.html
 

Quantos

Sock ? What Sock
Mar 6, 2005
7,619
5,825
Earth for now
✟33,990.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
This "Girls Gone Wild" series is just plain disgusting.

Filming underage girls, partially of fully naked, is child inappropriate contentography. This guy should get a life prison sentence.
So my vids of my kids getting a bath is CP ?
 
Upvote 0

flicka

Contributor
Supporter
Dec 9, 2003
7,936
616
✟36,117.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
As sleezy as this guy is it's not just all on him and I disagree with the whole "life in prison" sentiments. There are far worse things someone can do than filming more than willing girls taking their clothes off. If they provided fake id's I have no sympathy for them. I actually know a girl who appeared in one of those videos, someone my daughter went to high school with. It was quite a shock for us to see her in the commercials! She was 19 at the time.
 
Upvote 0

lawtonfogle

My solace my terror, my terror my solace.
Apr 20, 2005
11,585
350
35
✟13,892.00
Faith
Christian
So my vids of my kids getting a bath is CP ?
Depends upon how nice the judge is/ if a vigilante gets the information.

P.S. What type of shape is that in your avatar. I can make up my mind is it an optical illusion, or something which may actually be buildable.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Billnew

Legend
Apr 23, 2004
21,246
1,234
58
Ohio
Visit site
✟35,363.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Unless he got proof of age, he does deserve more prison time.
If he got proof of age, then they are guilty of fraud.
They would need to edit the underage girls out of the videos, but GGW would have shown good faith in trying to protect underage girls.
Like I said before, if they rpovided the girls liquor, he might have even more crimes against him.
But then again, if he carded them, then he would be protected.
 
Upvote 0

Billnew

Legend
Apr 23, 2004
21,246
1,234
58
Ohio
Visit site
✟35,363.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Unless he got proof of age, he does deserve more prison time.
If he got proof of age, then they are guilty of fraud.
They would need to edit the underage girls out of the videos, but GGW would have shown good faith in trying to protect underage girls.
Like I said before, if they rpovided the girls liquor, he might have even more crimes against him.
But then again, if he carded them, then he would be protected.
 
Upvote 0

DeathMagus

Stater of the Obvious
Jul 17, 2007
3,790
244
Right behind you.
✟20,194.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
I'd think he would have gotten the IDs photographed. He stopped by my university last year, and from what I've heard, he's a fairly nice guy. Apparently, girls who agree to be filmed have 24 hours to call in and say that they'd rather not be shown. I just don't think someone could do as well as he has without having enough brains to get IDs checked.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dracil

Well-Known Member
Dec 25, 2003
5,005
245
San Francisco
✟16,707.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
So my vids of my kids getting a bath is CP ?
Legally, I believe that's the case. That's American law for you. Depending on how the lawyers spin it, you might also be guilty of incestuous intentions and pedophilia.

And girls who take pictures/videos of themselves naked or whatever and post them on Myspace or whatever are also guilty of producing, possessing, and distributing CP. Think there were a couple cases of some girls who got arrested for this. Don't remember what happened afterwards.
 
Upvote 0
J

jamesrwright3

Guest
No, I don't think taking a video of your kid bathing would be considered inappropriate content. I am not sure what the legal definition of inappropriate content would be, but I think it needs to be something whose intent is for purposes of sexual gratification.etc. I know that I have seen cases where simple nudity was not considered inappropriate content.
 
Upvote 0

Lockguy3000

Senior Member
Nov 14, 2007
1,075
62
NYC
✟9,055.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
This guy should be sentenced to have woman's implants for a year.
for exploiting young women

16.gif
 
Upvote 0

DeathMagus

Stater of the Obvious
Jul 17, 2007
3,790
244
Right behind you.
✟20,194.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
Depending on how the lawyers spin it, you might also be guilty of incestuous intentions and pedophilia.

It's against the law to be a pedophile? I thought you had to actually do something: like child molestation or possession of child inappropriate contentography.

How could NAMBLA exist if what you say is true?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
J

jamesrwright3

Guest
I don't think simple nudity is considered to be inappropriate contentography..so I don't think filming your child in a bathtub would be considered to be inappropriate contentography. I think it has to be lewd and sexual in nature..and for purposes of sexual gratification.

I think in this case we need to split up the plaintiffs into two separate groups. If the 16 and 17 year old showed him fake ID indicating they were at least 18, then I think he may be off the hook for those two since there may not be much, if any, physical differences between a 16 or 17 year old and an 18 year old..I don't think they really have a case to get money from this guy.

However, that cannot be said for the 13 and 14 year olds. Those girls had to have looked like girls that could not have been above the age of legality..There is no way you can mistake a 13 year old girl for an 18 year old girl..no matter how mature she is...Even if these younger girls showed him fake IDs, he should have known something was fishy and erred on the side of caution...but legally they are still above the age of reason and could potentially have some liability as well for representing themselves as being of age, if they did. Whether they get any money depends on Florida law. In some states even if you are 1% liable for a tort, you cannot collect anything.
 
Upvote 0