'Girls Gone Wild' founder gets jail time

[Starbucks Anarchist]

Source: Yahoo

PANAMA CITY, Fla. - Blowing his nose and wiping away tears, the multimillionaire founder of the "Girls Gone Wild" video empire pleaded guilty to contempt of court Monday and was sentenced to 35 days in jail.

Joe Francis, who was sued by seven women who were minors when filmed, apologized to the judge for yelling at the plaintiffs during settlement talks.

"I am sorry for my behavior. It was wrong. I had heard about appeals and things and I was confused. I am sorry, I really am," said Francis, 34.

Francis drew the contempt charge during negotiations to settle the federal lawsuit brought after his production company filmed the women at Panama City Beach in 2003.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070423/ap_on_re_us/girls_gone_wild

---

Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. :sarcasm:

[Ecumenist]

1. Po' thang...

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

[MethuenProgressive]

2. The girls lied about their ages, and now get to split $70 million dollars?

I wouldn't be surprised to learn more than a few of the girls had lawyers lined up before they "went wild" for the cameras....

[MADem]

5. Well, that's what the crybaby CLAIMED in a statement to AP. I think he's a liar, myself. NT

[skyounkin]

7. gotta agree

Everybody was guilty in this thing- like it or not sex sells- Naked girls sells BIG. Could this have been a planned thing? Sure, but if Joe was smart he would have been ready.

Oh well, put him next to the eron guy and duke cunningham- at least Joe was partially a sucessful business man.

[Dora]

29. He was a predator and a criminal. He preyed on women.

He deserves none of his ill-gotten gains.

One could also say that Bush was a "partially a successful business man."

There is no defense for people who profit from the induction of misery.

[Crayson]

32. Why...? The GIRLS went wild.. not him...

All I know about Girls gone Wild movies is that he prefered to film spring break parties at beaches.
The girls are not forced to do anything.

My point is:
The girls would have had a wild spring break anyway, else they wouldn't have gone there.

Only question is:
Did they agree to being filmed or not, or were they so drunk that they agreed to anything?
Well and then there is the law of course.
^_^

But I wouldn't paint the picture of the wild rabid predator who slobbers all over girls.
The girls would have done it anyway in spring break.
They're no better than him.

[Dora]

35. Here's an opportunity to learn some more about Joe Francis.

This in-depth profile of Joe Francis was written by a female reporter who accompanied him over a length of several weeks. It's based both on research of public records, interviews, and first-hand observation.

http://www.latimes.com/features/magazine/west/la-tm-gonewild32aug06,0,2664370.story

Read this, and then think about if you'd be okay with him partying with your sister, or your daughter, or your neighbor's kids.

Read this article, and think about it.

***
Above the dance floor, the stage is full of girls who rotate, twist and shimmy their way up and down three strip poles. One of them is Jannel Szyszka, a petite 18-year-old who prances around the stage like a star....

Szyszka tells me later that as she was spinning around the strip pole that night, Francis appeared, grabbed her arm and pulled her toward him. "You are so going on the bus later," she recalls Francis saying. "I was like, 'Um, OK.' I was shocked. I was like, 'Whoa—Joe's, like, trying to talk to me, like out of all the girls in here.'" Francis invited her back to the VIP area to do shots with him, she says, and she said yes.

Szyszka says the more shots she drank, the cloudier her judgment became. She says she agreed to join Francis and his crew on the "Girls Gone Wild" bus. "I thought 'Girls Gone Wild' was like flashing, and I thought I would flash them and be done. And so when I'm walking to the bus, that's all I'm thinking is going to happen."

At first she felt comfortable, she says. Inebriated and excited, she says she was led to the back of the bus, to a small bedroom. The double bed, with its neatly folded iridescent purple sheets, takes up most of the room. A flat-screen TV faces the bed, and cabinets are filled with remote controls, lubricants, condoms, sex toys in plastic bags, baby oil, a DVD called "How to be a Player" and a clipboard full of waivers for girls to sign. A small bathroom is off to the side, with a half-sized shower with faux marble tiling, and on the floor of the shower is a crate holding cheap and fruity-flavored rum, whiskey, tequila and Kool-Aid.

Footage from that night shows a close-up of Szyszka's driver's license, proving she's not a minor. The camera then captures Szyszka lying on the bed. Her nails are chipped, her eyes coated with makeup. Following a camerman's instructions, she shows her breasts and says, "Girls Gone Wild." She seems shy but willing. She smiles. The unseen cameraman asks her to take off her shirt, her skirt, then her underwear. She sprawls on the bed, her legs open. At his suggestion, she masturbates with a dildo, saying repeatedly that it hurts but also feels good. Francis enters the room at certain points and you hear his voice, low and flirtatious, telling her, "You are so adorable." When she says she's a virgin, he responds: "Great. You won't be after my cameraman gets done with you."

[RevolutionStartsNow]

49. Ugh, what a scumbag

I read that article, and while I support free speech and the free market, he's just an asshole. Glad to see him taken down a notch.

[lildreamer316]

51. Please read the article posted by the other poster.

He's an asshole an a potential rapist and an abusive person.

[Centered]

57. He may be a Jerk

But I really don't like the term "potential rapist" you either are a rapist or you aren't but people should not be judged on "potential"

[MLFerrell]

58. "...people should not be judged on "potential"

Indeed. But if ever there were a nomination for "Potential Rapist", this guy is the number one candidate.

[Centered]

59. how about compromise

let's call him an asshat?

That work for everyone :)

[MLFerrell]

60. Yep...

Works for me!

[LynneSin]

83. I hope you read that LA Times article - Joe Francis is scum and a predator

It's one thing to get an already drunk girl to perhaps lift up her shirt, but that RV he used for filming was stocked with additional booze in hopes to further intoxicate the girls so their inhibitions would be lowered even further.

He is a predator. At least with pornography you know the women in those movies are being paid money and are willing participants in those films. These girls are being duped for nothing more but GGW undies. His amassed fortune should be taken from him and handed out to every one of those girls in the video

[Exiled in America]

34. EDITED - I shouldn't be writing today

I just lost my job... if I'm not careful I'm going to write angry things all over the board as projection. :(

[Dora]

36. That's okay. There are many of us carrying the torch. n/t

[superconnected]

62. Sorry to hear about your job.

Sending you good karma.

[LanternWaste]

46. Everyone was guilty of being in contempt of court????

Everyone was guilty of being in contempt of court????

[LostinVA]

18. I hope they get $170 million

He's a sociopathic scum.

[Dora]

30. I couldn't agree more. He needs a taste of his own. n/t

[LostinVA]

90. Yup

[bleedingheart]

31. and if he was any sort of "business man"...he would have check id

and double checked it again...

[Exiled in America]

33. Agreed.

[lildreamer316]

50. You've got to be kidding.

How do you know they lied?
Glad we are blaming the victim, as usual. Not saying the girls don't have some responsibility; but they are YOUNG and "dumb" (follys of youth kinda dumb, not stupid).
You weren't there, you don't know. Neither do I. Neither does anyone else except those ppl involved. But Joe Francis is an abusive asshole who twisted a reporter's arm and assaulted her because she didn't like his advances.
http://www.latimes.com/features/magazine/west/la-tm-gonewild32aug06,0,2664370.story

[superconnected]

63. they admit in the artical he was sloppy and not checking ids.

Apparently he forgets to get releases(written permission) when he's filming too.

[MADem]

3. Blowing his nose and wiping away tears

:rofl: :rofl:


For thirty five fucking days in the can, he's sobbing like a child? And claiming to be "confused?"

What a wuss. What an asshole. And let's not even mention how fucking STOOOOOOOOPID the guy is:

Attorneys for the women said Francis, who makes a reported $29 million a year taping topless women for his videos, lost his temper in negotiations and yelled obscenities at them.

U.S. District Judge Richard Smoak ordered Francis to settle the case or go to jail for contempt of court. When talks fell through, Francis lashed out at Smoak in the media, calling him a "judge gone wild" and questioning the judge's authority to order a settlement.

Smoak had ordered Francis to surrender to U.S. marshals by April 5 and begin serving time on the contempt charge. He did not return to Panama City from his California home until April 10, when authorities met him at the airport.

I agree, couldn't have happened to a 'nicer' guy!

[UNCLE_Rico]

28. Just a few things to consider... (meant to reply to OP, SORRY Madem)

1) Francis is just a DRIPPING, OOZING and RIPE target for a hit piece. Not only is he stupid RICH (especially for his age), he's also basically a cocky pornographer who traffics in YOUTHFUL sexuality. Men are jealous of him (even though they secretly love his commercials and wish they could get away with a subscription), both for his success and his, err, "lifestyle" shall we say... And women over the age of, say, 24, are universally, of course, also going to hate him, be they from either side of the political aisle (as we see here today and in all the other threads about the man), for reasons I don't think need any extrapolation upon.
2) In the overall, lets face it, the LA Times has not exactly been a bastion of truthful reporting in recent years, IMHO. And amongst the MANY motivations they would have to smear Francis is the fact that LA is chock-full of Porn Pioneers, owners of competing Porn empires. Empires that are NO DOUBT very envious of Francis' level of ubiquity and success.
3) Therefore, a sensationalistic piece about the man, making it sound like he's the schmuckola that EVERYONE wants him to turn out to be IS NOT EVEN going to be QUESTIONED, either by the reporters editors, NOR by 'the right', NOR (apparently) by anyone on 'the left'. Thus, there's literally NO incentive I can see for the Times to portray the man as anything BUT what their reading audience already believes and wants to hear.
4) One thing I noticed (after reconsidering my initially disgusted reaction) was that when I went back and CAREFULLY read that excerpt (in the post above) without interjecting my own preconceptions and without falling for the obviously sensational 'bait' proffered by the (actually quite vague) descriptions of the incident, the WORST thing that I can CONCLUSIVELY determine Francis was doing was trying to snatch the reporters notebook from her, perhaps believing that by doing so he would preempt the publishing of the piece ... and for that, she punched him in the face. Could it be that at SOME POINT in the interview he came to realize that she was writing a (premeditated) hit piece? Could it be he was LIED TO by the Times in order to secure his permission for said piece?
5) You GOTTA know that Sen. Brownback and Co. receive a MINIMUM of, oh, I'd guess 10 letters a DAY from Mr. and Mrs. Fundynutz in Podunk, KA complaining about the ubiquitous GGW commercials coming up all the time on their cable tee-vee and how they're having this god-awful corrupting influence on their entire family, man, woman, and child!
6) Oh, and connecting the dots for everyone here, with regards to the 2003 arrest - he was charged in ... uh, WHICH STATE was that again? Who was Governor at that time, could someone remind me?
7) Which country is this we live in again? Our Constitution says WHAT about guilt vs. innocence? Help me out guys, I forget how that whole thing works?

So, with all this in mind, I pose the following:
8) What, if anything, would change about your opinion of Francis in general if you found out that the girls involved in 2003 were all from the BattleCry 'movement'? If you don't know what that is, I highly suggest you pick up the Rolling Stone with the "Grindhouse" cover and READ UP. This is SO LIKE THEM, their type of target, using methods that are basically according to their tenets. This scenario is entirely plausible, but even if I'm wrong, I still want you to consider what your answer would be to the question.
9) Lets assume for a moment that Francis simply didn't know the girls in 2003 were underage. Lets say they even LIED. Just, hypothetically, you know, not that kids would do that to get on TV or anything. And please, don't get me WRONG, I mean, that is PURE SPECULATION, and sure, it has to be the adult male that's evil and 'at fault' in situations like this, I DO understand that fundamental tenet of life on this planet. But, um, like, WHY DON'T THEY GET IN TROUBLE TOO? If Francis were a BARTENDER, serving drinks to minors with fake ID's, even if he checked, guess what? He AND the minors BOTH get busted. Why aren't these girls in trouble for breaking the law. Don't they know it's ILLEGAL for them, as MINORS to get their damn breasts FILMED?
10) Somebody please explain to me WHY photographing/filming a girl or a womans BREASTS, part of her own natural, beautiful, god-given body, is a crime AT ANY AGE if the girl/woman willingly consents to the picture taking? We're not talking sex here people (although even for that I personally think that if a person is old enough to get charged with adult crimes in adult court and go to adult jail, they are most certainly old enough to choose their sexual partners - but that's irrelevant to the subject at hand), ultimately, they're just movies with a females mammary glands exposed.

Are my fellow DU'ers truly this puritanical? Women and girls here - when you were, say 16, think back to how you felt about your body, yourself, your freedom, and the perception you had of your sensual nature being forcibly repressed by all the friggin old people who'd clearly forgotten or chose to ignore how THEY felt when they were your age. You would've wanted to show your damn boobies off if you damn well pleased. Are you now just one of those same uptight controlling know-it-all OLD PEOPLE?

After you've considered my points here, just do me a quick favor and ponder the extremely POSSIBLE - that the right-wing is simply taking this guy DOWN however they can, and that includes an LA Times hit piece and trumped up charges in FL (perhaps using girls from this BattleCry gang). And then contemplate your reaction to a scenario where the Times article was, say, an interview with Larry Flynt, who'd been charged with the same thing in 2003 in the same place, and it was written by Ann Coulter for the National Review. Given that particular circumstance, can you admit I wouldn't even have had to write this post, because by the time I got to it, other DU'ers would've already pointed out most if not all of what I'm saying here.

I'm not defending this guy, I don't know much about him ... other than he's just really easy to not like. Maybe he's a terrible person. But I personally am going to wait until the jury's verdict myself.

Peace,
Out

[zalinda]

37. The problem most of us have with this situation

is not the flashing, but getting the girls so drunk or drugged, that those who wouldn't normally flash do. There is a lot of drugs and alcohol being consumed before filming, and they are supplying the "lubricant" to get these girls to do things they normally wouldn't do.

It is one thing to film girls flashing at a party, and quite another to ply them with drugs and liquor to do it.

zalinda

[truebrit71]

81. Agreed...I think we have ALL done or said things under the influence...

...that would not have occurred otherwise...

BTW anyone that wants to see my man-boobies just let me know.... :evilgrin:

[clspector]

41. oh, please

>>Are my fellow DU'ers truly this puritanical? Women and girls here - when you were, say 16, think back to how you felt about your body, yourself, your freedom, and the perception you had of your sensual nature being forcibly repressed by all the friggin old people who'd clearly forgotten or chose to ignore how THEY felt when they were your age. You would've wanted to show your damn boobies off if you damn well pleased. Are you now just one of those same uptight controlling know-it-all OLD PEOPLE?<<

Anyone who portrays women as sluts just "asking for it," is scum.

Sorry, adults are supposed to *protect* underage people, not fucking exploit them. But hey, nice attempt to try and pretend that we're all old fuddy-duddies here trying to suppress the "natural" instincts.

I don't believe that this guy is anything other than a cheap ass pornographer who made his trade in exploiting women. Were some of those women willingly exploited? Sure. But if you are under the age of consent, you CANNOT BY LAW consent. I don't give a tinker's damn if they thought that they were able to consent. I don't even care if they had fake I.D.s. If you don't like the age of consent, then by all means, lobby to have it change.

But it was HIS responsibility to ensure that the people he was exploiting were legally able to consent. Since he didn't tough fucking shit. He got off with a slap on the wrist. He's a punk and a coward. And when he gets out of jail, he'll got right back to doing the same thing. It's obvious that he hates women. It's a pity there are some many young women out there who hate themselves as well.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

43. Well said.

And I'm not uptight, nor old, like the poster you're replying to implied.

[LostinVA]

89. Excellent post n/t

[lildreamer316]

52. I'm a stripper.

I like men in general. I have dealt with many of them over my 13 years of employment in my chosen profession. I would not be in this if I hated men. Most men who come to see me worship the female body; and most of them are respectful and polite. No, really.

I have seen men like this. I have watched Joe on his videos.
If he came in the club; I would avoid him like the plauge. He's an ass.
Of course that's just my opinion; but I have a sense of what men want in a sexually charged situation.
He is a danger to women of any stripe; and believe it or not; to my profession and the porn industry too. Not because of his profits; because there is always more to be made. Because of the disrespect he shows.
I know people in the porn industry. They do not welcome him. Again, it is not now about the money. It is about,believe it or not; his lack of standards. Yes, I am perfectly serious.

Get a grip about this. It is not a man-hating thing. Any man who likes naked women and porn should regard this man as a danger and an asshole.

He's getting a taste of his own medicine. If he was disrespectful to a COURT OF LAW: of COURSE he is disrespectful to women!!! DUH!

I am all for the women taking responsibility for their actions; but they are young and not experienced. I won't say dumb, because they are not; but the folly of youth; as you will. Of course they should have known better; resisted the lure of tv; blah blah. I think you are expecting too much from such girls.

I hope this will turn around and bite him in the ass by creating a backlash against the exploitation of UNDERAGE (looking or in reality) not mature girls. It plays on the edge of pedophilia and on the lure of that; and that is disgusting.

[MADem]

70. Interesting and insightful analysis, from the battlefield, as it were.

I think you're right.

[colorado_ufo]

92. Very well said!

Joe Francis has no standards and is an out-of-control, spoiled child made dangerous by wealth and the sycophants surrounding him. He has absolutely no thought for anything or anyone besides his own greed and need. Would it have been difficult to ask for a damn ID from these girls?

Francis is actually fortunate that this virtual slap on the wrist has made him pause, before he deluded himself into much more serious trouble.

[Taverner]

93. He's beyond asshole

Everything about him in the LA Times article said "predator."

If he wasn't famous he'd be the guy they catch slipping roofies into women's drinks - and it may be that he is that guy...

[MLFerrell]

53. "For thirty five fucking days in the can, he's sobbing like a child?"

That was my first thought as well. What a coward! I did 32 days in 2002. Wouldn't want to do it again, but I can assure you that I didn't bawl like a little girl.

Someone's going to beat the fucking Jesus out of this guy while he's locked up, if not worse... And I'll be doing this:

:nopity:

[MADem]

69. Heh, heh!!! NT

[Bicoastal]

4. Joe tried to stylize himself as the next Hugh Hefner...

...but it's clear he wasn't even the next Larry Flynt.

For those of you who choose to see this guy as a first amendment champion, and his photo subjects as dumb trollops who got no less than they deserved, this LA Times expose may prove enlightening.

[MADem]

6. Woah...give the lazy a TASTE...that is some UGLY shit, there...

...He has turned on me, and I don't know why. He's going on and on about Panama City Beach, the spring break spot in northern Florida where Bay County sheriff's deputies arrested him three years ago on charges of racketeering, drug trafficking and promoting the sexual performance of a child. As he yells, I wonder if this is a flashback, or if he's punishing me for being the only blond in sight who's not wearing a thong. This much is certain: He's got at least 80 pounds on me and I'm thinking he's about to break my left arm. My eyes start to stream tears....I've been with him nonstop since early afternoon, listening as he teases employees, flying on his private jet, eating fast food and watching young women hurl themselves against his 6-foot-2-inch frame, declaring, "We want to go wild!"

Tonight we had spent almost five hours in a sweaty nightclub, crowded with 2,500 very young and very drunk people. Clubs like this are fertile fields for Francis. He's made a fortune selling videos of women who agree to flash their breasts and French-kiss their friends for the cameras. In exchange, a girl who goes wild will receive a T-shirt, a pair of panties, maybe a trucker hat. It had been a typical night for him. He'd scoured the club, recruiting young and, for the most part, intoxicated women. Because filming wasn't allowed inside, he and his newly discovered entourage had stepped outside, heading for the confines of a "Girls Gone Wild" tour bus parked across the street.

Before climbing aboard, he walks in my direction, and the next thing I know, he's acting out his 2003 arrest on me.

I wriggle free and punch him in the face, closed-fist but not too hard.

"Damn," bystanders say. Francis barely blinks. He snatches at my notebook. He is amped, his broad face sneering as he does a sort of boxer's skip around me, jabbering, grabbing at my arms and my stomach as I try to move away, clutching my notebook to my chest. He stabs a finger in my face, shouting, "You don't care about the 1st Amendment. I care about the 1st Amendment, but you are the kind of reporter who doesn't care."....

Fucking asshole.

[Bluestar]

14. Thanks for posting this

I don't think this article from the LA Times Magazine got much play. It showed the true character of Joe Francis. I think he is a thug and a liar. I'm happy he is going to get a taste of jail.

[MADem]

15. Definitely a sicko. Selfish as hell, rude, crazy--and that's the milder stuff.

He seems to me like the kind of guy that will end up involved in a murder someday. Just too...volatile. Intemperate. Certainly vicious.

[LynneSin]

85. I wouldn't call Joe Francis a thug at all

I'd call him a pussy, a liar, a manipulator and without a doubt a predator.

I had started a thread in DU about a month ago when he was first being held in contempt of court. One of the posters mentioned that the porn industry pretty much finds Joe Francis a disgusting pig

[dorktv]

8. Showing respect to the court is always the best move.

[Ninja Jordan]

9. This is truly becoming Nazi Germany (nm)

[Starbucks Anarchist]

10. How?

[Ninja Jordan]

12. I'm joking.

[knight_of_the_star]

11. Whoop de do

Contempt of Court is what, ten days or something like that. It's a slap on the wrist at best, and a light one at that.

[emilyg]

13. glad his ass is in jail.

[mitchleary]

16. Reminds me of the

CSI:Miami last week where some starlet tells Callie being in the posh rehab facility is just like being in prison since they are not allowed to leave. Callie looks at her and soberingly says, "This is nothing like prison."

[LostinVA]

17. THAT'S IT???

It should be 35 damned years. At least.

Raping scum sexual predator.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

19. This was just for contempt of court, though, not rape charges.

But I agree, he should be put away for a long time for those offenses.

[LostinVA]

20. I realized that after I posted it

I just loathe that SOB so much.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

22. Totally understandable.

[MissMillie]

21. think we can sell the video of his tears in court

during late night TV

I'd pay to see that.

[heliarc]

26. And call it...

Boy's gone stupid.

[MissMillie]

27. yep

:thumbsup:

:hi:

[Javaman]

23. 35 days??? pfffft! this scumbag will be a celebrity in jail.

he films underage women, cheats on his taxes and only gets 35 days? Yet we send people who are caught with a joint to jail for 10 years.

America, what a country!!

sigh. I get so tired of living in an alternative universe.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

24. For contempt of court, not any rape or tax charges.

[Scurrilous]

25. Joe Francis Pleads Guilty, Faces More Penal Pain

<snip>

"But that's not it for Francis -- he still faces the wrath of state officials, who want Joe for bringing cash and prescription drugs into the county lockup. The original plan, according to the Bay County Sheriff, was to arrest Francis once he's done with his federal jail time."

http://httpwww.tmz.com/2007/04/23/joe-francis-pleads-guilty-faces-more-penal-pain/

[MADem]

38. The follow-on links inside your link are fodder, too! What a putz!!! NT

[LynneSin]

86. Get this - there's a neato twist about the 35 days

you can probably google this and find the information but if Francis is in jail for more than 30 days then it ups the charges on his tax invasion due to a criminal record.

I'm probably not explaining this properly - but Francis begged the judge for less than 30 days so his tax invasion charges would not be as horrid

[HuffleClaw]

39. a 'win' for the morality gestapo

distasteful stuff imo, but hardly criminal. such is life under BushCo.

[QC]

44. Yep, throwing a pornographer in jail for refusing to settle a case

is just as bad as the Holocaust.

Whatever.

[LanternWaste]

47. Would you please elucidate...

Would you please elucidate why you believe that a contempt of court charge is part and parcel of the "morality gestapo?

Were there no contempt of court charges prior to the Bush* administration? Is it unique to the past six years? If not, what is the precise and relevant difference between contempt of court charges during say, Clinton's administration over this one?

[Richard Steele]

71. "Contempt of Court" has nothing do do with the moral issues involved in the case itself.

Whether guilty or innocent, showing your ass to the Judge
is ALWAYS a very bad idea.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

40. The LA Times story:

http://www.latimes.com/features/magazine/west/la-tm-gonewild32aug06,0,2664370.story">Joe Francis: 'Baby, give me a kiss'

It's just a tad revealing as to Francis' personality. Just a tad.

[Beaverhausen]

42. Good- well it's a start anyway

I say shut this guy down altogether. He is scum.

[ryanmuegge]

45. This guy had the best job ever. I'm envious.

[LanternWaste]

48. What's stopping you? Respect? Decency? Civility?

Go to a college and find an assortment of women. Get to them when they're feeling their first taste of 'spreading their wings' so to speak and while being away from their parents for the first time.

Imply that if they lie to you about their age, you won't question it. Then ply them with liquor and make them promises you can't keep. Whatever happens, make sure you show no respect for them either as women or as human beings. Ask them to humiliate themselves and encourage them to do so. During this "harmless" bit of fun, videotape it.

No reason *not* to video tape a young person humiliating themselves and compromising themselves, right? It's their decision to denigrate themselves, not yours-- so you get a free pass and can even profit from it. It's not like we're actually supposed to watch out for each other-- that's so "old-fashioned", and surely you're a trendy and edgy guy, ready to make money from a mistake someone will regret later...

What's stopping you? Respect? Decency? Civility? If not, go for it!!!

Sheesh.

[MLFerrell]

56. Well said...

That does about sum it up, now doesn't it?

[ryanmuegge]

65. Absolutely. It is their decision.

Admittedly, the guy that does this is a sleazy prick, and I'm sure he does try to manipulate the women to some extent. Come on, though, they have to know what they're getting into at this point. Everybody's heard of girls gone wild. They do make the choice. Believe it or not, some people like denigrating themselves. Ever watch Jerry Springer?! Girls at my age know they look good; they know they're in their physical prime. They like showing themselves off. Why do you think girls on a college campus dress the way they do? It's all a part of conformity in college: try to act more crazy than the next person to show that you're more of a party person and more fun. These things happen when people have that attitude.

And, come on: I'm not a woman, but at 16, I had enough sense to realize (hypothetically) that taking my clothes off on camera for some guy is something that could come back to haunt me. Personal responsibility and common sense have to come into play at some point. Being drunk is no excuse, either. I've been really drunk many, many times. I've never done anything stupid or gotten into a fight or anything like that. Being 18-19 is also no excuse. I guess I feel no overwhelming need to protect the stupid and privileged (obviously if they're in college, they must be to some extent). These are not exactly girls that grew up in complete poverty prostituting themselves for drug money we're talking about. All of this isn't done out of desperation, it's done out of vanity on the part of the girls.

I'm sure I'll get flamed or whatever, but it's just an opinion.

[superconnected]

66. The guys a borderline rapist.

I don't think most guys would hang so close to the edge on whether it's consent or not.

I don't think most filmmakers would skip getting releases. This guy was making money off of GGW for 8 years before he shot the teens, and he didn't think to check ID's and get releases till after they sued?

I notice in the article he checks and gets releases now.

He's been sued over a dozen times for a reason.

I consider how he talks to women scary. Apparently the judges finds it a problem too, or the guy wouldn't have ended up in jail for it.

I'm sure there are willing gals out there who don't need to be drunk first. He however makes it a point of getting them drunk.

I doubt you or most guys really would sink to his antics.

I also suspect he could have had the same success with his flash flicks by being legit and using sober, willing participants.

[LanternWaste]

68. The opinion you'll get flamed for is

Simply agreeing or disagreeing with a position won't get you flamed, but the reasons might...

The opinion you'll get flamed for is, "this guy has the best job ever. I'm envious." To me, that implies that you not only agree with what he's doing, you'd do it in a heartbeat too if you could.

Or maybe you'll get flamed for believing that simply because someone is in college, they're privileged-- regardless of whether they're working one full time job, one part time job while maintaining 18 credit hours per semester, as I did.

Or maybe you'll get flamed for implying some people are too rich to need help. Is there some litmus test we're supposed to hold people to determine if they need guidance or help or assistance? If so, what are the minimums and maximums?


"Well, she's young, rich and in college-- so there's no social or moral obligation laid on me to look out for her and point out when she's about to make a mistake."

[ryanmuegge]

75. Well, I like naked girls. Sue me.

I work a full-time job, too, and I'm an English major (reading a couple hundred pages a night). Most people on campus with me don't work. I'm making generalizations based upon what I see every day here. I guess it comes down to responsibility. My family is FAR from well-off and I can tell you that class is very significant in EVERYTHING. Again, I could have told you at 15 that doing something like this is a bad idea. Just as I knew that getting in fights or being caught DWI or smoking weed could come back to haunt me later in life, especially when it came to a job search. Therefore, I didn't do any of that shit. It's just common sense. This is not kiddie porn we're talking about here.

Do I feel sympathy for the 655,000 Iraqi civillians slaughtered as a result of US terrorism? Hell yes. There was no choice in that. Do I feel bad for some girl who got really drunk one night and decided to flash their breasts for some money? No. Come on.

I've never seen a girls gone wild video, mind you, but the commercials I've seen are just drunk girls flashing their breasts for a second. I don't see anything overly exploitative or degrading about that. I don't see what the big deal is, seriously. I don't see these girls getting sucked into the dark underworld of the porn industry - it all seems like a one-time deal. Also, these are probably not girls turning to this out of economic desperation. It's all vanity. Would I like to be able to go around with a camera and get girls to flash their breasts to me at parties on command? Are you kidding? Of course. Bottom line: most of the girls think they're hot and love the attention.


Also, there appears to be this sexist double-standard here. If these were a couple of guys of the same age and social situation that were duped into this, would there be all of this outcry? I doubt it. Yet, when it's women, we all feel the need to be protective of little women because they can't make their own decisions and everyone gets outraged.

That said, if these were my daughters on camera, I'd be pissed and would want to kill the guy.

Anyway, this is a waste of time to talk about even. There are much more important things going on in the world.

[LanternWaste]

76. Talking about one does not reduce the empathy for another.

There are many important things to talk about in this world. Talking about one does not reduce the empathy for another.

I don't think anyone would sue you for liking naked girls. But you're not going to get much sympathy for condoning the exploitation of them around here.

"Also, there appears to be this sexist double-standard here."
You appear to make a statement of fact based the absence of evidence. Simply because you don't observe any outcry about young males getting exploited doesn't mean the outcry doesn't exist.

"Bottom line: most of the girls think they're hot and love the attention."
Or, more precisely-- Most of the girls are exploited due to youth and inexperience so someone can profit off of them.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

79. That's not the point at all.

He filmed drunk MINORS -- there's the difference.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

80. It's more than just a few girls "flashing their breasts"

Check out the LA Times Article written last August: Joe Francis: 'Baby, give me a kiss'

It's a fascinating bit of insight into the life of Joe Francis.

[MLFerrell]

54. "This guy had the best job ever. I'm envious. "

I disagree. He had a lucrative job in which he got to see young girls naked.

I don't know about you, but I prefer to have a career with some meaning to it. This guy contributes nothing meaningful to society, thus I would argue that his job is an utter waste.

[jollyreaper2112]

88. yeah, right

How many of us have meaningful jobs? I'd take "titty watcher" over "office drone" any day of the week.

There's nothing wrong with porn so long as everything is above the table and on the level, consensual. There's too much anger going back and forth regarding this case to know for sure. I know there are certainly cocky asshole guys working in the industry and are certainly the ones you'd like to see humbled and humiliated. At the same time, it's not illegal to be a jerk, it's illegal to break the law. So that's the real question. If he played loose with the law, then he really was an idiot as well as a jerk, he's giving his enemies ammunition.

There's a big trend towards the gonzo porn where they try to make it seem all amateur, picking people up off the street who just happen to be willing to go on camera and do all sorts of things. It's no more real than the Blair Witch Project; yes, it's people doing things on camera but they're actors. The people on camera have to sign releases or else the producer will be in trouble. Of course, as with all contracts, verbal doesn't mean squat if it ain't on paper. Some of these people will tell all sorts of lies that aren't backed up in writing. The most laughable is when someone is told that the video will only be up for a month and then taken down and never out in public again. That isn't the case and so someone who thinks they're going to be able to do porno and not have people find out will be sadly surprised.

That's something I never really understood with these girls gone wild girls. They go and intentionally get bombed out of their minds in public, then flash their breasts in public, and then they act surprised that people took pictures? They're surprised they get posted? It's not invasion of privacy if you do it in public and even if you took the photos in private, nude photos always come out! Just ask Dr. Laura. For Christ's sake, if they got bombed and went home with some guy they met, who knows who he really is? He could be some psycho for all they know. Sure, killing them would be rather rude of him and illegal but will that bring them back from the dead? People have got to exercise some common sense.

[progressoid]

55. Oh boo hoo.

[Jennicut]

61. This guy is so slimy, why any woman would show her stuff off for a t-shirt to this guy is beyond me

But I remember guys like that ay college. I once went to a rugby party at college and the older guys were telling me at 18 that I needed to create some independence and get really drunk so I could seperate myself from my parents. I said that was such BS. Joe Francis is human scum just like those horny drunk gross guys I saw at these college parties, desperate to take advantage of a young female just to get sex, or in Francis's case, some nudie video shots. Or maybe both. Ick. Needless to say, I never got drunk at that party. I stayed a virgin until I was 23 after I met the right guy (who I married and had two little girls with). I have no regrets of not partying harder in school. I feel bad for some of these girls. They get drunk, think about the flattery and attention and then wake up the next morning feeling like a used bimbo. Or at least some do. Joe Francis is just a vulture who made lots of money taking advantage of people.

[LynneSin]

87. Depends on the woman......

I would think any sober woman would, without a doubt, reject his advances immediately

But we're not dealing with sober women here - he preys on the drunk and then gets them even DRUNKER in order to get these girls to comply to his wishes. I know that we should all be responsible for our actions while inebriated but when you have a man making a fortune off the drunken state of women it's very difficult to find fault in these girls.

[undergroundpanther]

64. I hope

some person in jail just kills him.I hate people like him they are scum.Exploiters of girls who are made to feel invisible.And in case you didn't know many girls who do the sex this pig profits from have abuse histories be it sexual,emotional or neglect.And shows like the ones he makes normalizes exploitation.I hate him and people like him.

While stings to bust Porn Rings focus on arresting pedophils and perpetrators of sexual abuse and gathering evidence - how much thought is given to the subjects of pornographic movies and still pictures? How many consider how it would affect grown women and men to be suddenly faced with a request to identify pornographic pictures of children in compomising positions and behaviors and discover they are the subjects of the photos shown them?

http://www.goessoftlyishere.com/TAINTED.html

[militaryspouse]

67. He had it coming

wow, he only got 35 days, and he CRIED??

I don't feel sorry for him, I heard that he actually sexually assaulted some of the girls.

[MADem]

72. That's just for the contempt, not for the other stuff. He's still on the hook

for the assaults...

[Starbucks Anarchist]

77. Drug charges, too.

[AnnieBW]

73. Prisoners Gone Wild

Here's hoping that Joe doesn't drop the soap in the communal showers. Normally I wouldn't joke about prison rape, but this scumbucket really has it coming.

[Up2Late]

74. WooHoo! Good! He such an arrogant A**hole, but I bet he buys his way out of jail.

:woohoo: :rofl:

[okieinpain]

78. 35 days. is that all, and he's crying about that. man that should

be like a freakin vaction for him.

[Scurrilous]

82. Sex charge filed against 'Gone Wild' creator

<snip>

"Girls Gone Wild creator Joseph Francis was charged Wednesday with misdemeanor sexual battery for allegedly groping an 18-year-old girl.

Francis, who was jailed in Florida two weeks ago for criminal contempt and was indicted in Nevada this month for federal tax evasion, allegedly touched the woman's breast and buttocks repeatedly despite pleas to stop, city attorney spokesman Frank Mateljan said.

The alleged incident occurred during a Jan. 10 birthday party at the Geisha House in Hollywood, Calif., he said. The victim, whose name wasn't disclosed, filed a police report and prosecutors filed the sexual battery count Wednesday against the 34-year-old entrepreneur.

Arraignment was set for May 22 at the Hollywood courthouse but Francis isn't required to appear. If convicted, Francis could be sentenced to six months in jail and fined $2,000, Mateljan said.

Francis publicist Barry Roesler in New York said there was no immediate comment. Telephone voicemail messages left for Francis lawyers Charles Rettig in Beverly Hills and Jan Hanzlik in Los Angeles weren't immediately returned."

http://www.miamiherald.com/416/story/86354.html

[Starbucks Anarchist]

84. Excellent.

[LostinVA]

91. Wonderful news

[marzipanni]

94. Anyone been to the beaches of Brazil or the French Riviera?

I haven't, but I'd wager the local men (maybe not some tourists who gawk, and are titillated) can actually get used to seeing breasts without their gonads reigning over their brains. Sheesh, what a concept!
On the other extreme, if men believe they can't trust their, or other men's, gonadal dominance over their brains, they can have women wear burkas.
I would teach teenage girls that you don't have to do anything Playboy mag. or MTV deems sexy, just be yourself, and respect yourself enough to not get drunk. Good guys will be attracted to you.