"Girls Gone Wild" Founder Fined


karrie
#1
Tue Jan 23, 8:24 AM


LOS ANGELES, Jan 22 (Reuters Life!) - The founder of "Girls Gone Wild" videos featuring young women who take off their tops was fined $500,000 on Monday for violating rules designed to prevent exploitation of minors.
if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object();window.yzq_d['mcHpKdj8Ym0-']='&U=13bu9j1sg%2fN%3dmcHpKdj8Ym0-%2fC%3d541727.10008337.10692054.7707862%2fD%3dLREC %2fB%3d4038266';
Joe Francis, 33, also was ordered by a federal judge to perform 200 hours of community service and was placed on two years' probation as part of a plea agreement he reached with the Justice Department last September.

In pleading guilty to the two felony counts, Francis admitted he knowingly included footage of two females in his "Ultimate Spring Break" video series without having legible documentation of their ages, as required by law.

Prosecutors say the 2002 footage in question showed two under-age girls, both 17 years old, engaging in sexually explicit acts.

During Monday's sentencing hearing, Francis' lawyer, Aaron Dyer, described his client as a "quality individual" who was not involved in the actual filming and had admitted only that he had failed to keep proper records.

But Justice Department prosecutor Brent Ward told the judge that Francis created a culture in his company where women were plied with alcohol and taken to hotel rooms to be filmed "with little or no regard for their age, and without any regard for record-keeping" requirements.

The plea deal settled a similar case brought in Florida, where some of the videos were filmed, against Francis's California-based company, Mantra Films Inc.

In Florida last month, Mantra was fined $1.6 million, and Francis was ordered with other company employees to perform community service. He is appealing that part of the sentence.

Outside the courthouse on Monday, Francis said he was singled out for prosecution because of the high-profile nature of his "Girls Gone Wild" videos and because the "government needs to make an example."
 
Cannuck
#2
I've never actually seen any of these videos












Damn!!!
 
karrie
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

I've never actually seen any of these videos


I don't think you're missing much. I've never understood the point, but then, I'm a chick. Nowadays though, most of the guys I know seem to think they're boring, and would rather watch something a little more, um, grown up.
 
RomSpaceKnight
#4
Considering how much money he probably made his fines are a drop in the bucket. UI've never seen one either. Wouldn't mind though. Just for the artistic qualities of his films..................snort.
 
karrie
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by RomSpaceKnightView Post

Considering how much money he probably made his fines are a drop in the bucket. UI've never seen one either. Wouldn't mind though. Just for the artistic qualities of his films..................snort.

He's a freaking millionaire. he owns an island he lends out to celebs from what I've heard. I think you're right in that this really won't hurt him much.
 
tamarin
#6
I saw an investigative report segment on this last year. The video series hires young women to move around at holiday spots and find girls willing to peel it off. According to the report such girls are paid but those who are filmed are not. It seems the girls found lots of takers. It's amazing to think of how easily young women are encouraged to be a little if not a lot sexually brazen. ABC. Reminds me of the hardcore film producer called George who simply walked the streets of cities in the US and asked strangers to have sex with him. Plenty did. And on film. Is there something about the camera that makes many women suddenly want to become porn stars? Is the law missing out on something here?
 
karrie
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by tamarinView Post

I saw an investigative report segment on this last year. The video series hires young women to move around at holiday spots and find girls willing to peel it off. According to the report such girls are paid but those who are filmed are not. It seems the girls found lots of takers. It's amazing to think of how easily young women are encouraged to be a little if not a lot sexually brazen. ABC. Reminds me of the hardcore film producer called George who simply walked the streets of cities in the US and asked strangers to have sex with him. Plenty did. And on film. Is there something about the camera that makes many women suddenly want to become porn stars? Is the law missing out on something here?

A lot of it has to do with alcohol, and that's where a lot of these women really complain. They get drunk, and are goaded into stripping their tops and more off for the camera. They're asked to sign a release, and off goes the film company. half the time the girls don't even remember the whole incident, let alone signing the release. But, by the time it can make it to a court case, he's already made more money off of them than they can hope to recoup. They're victims, yet not really victims in the eyes of many. I think chances are good he'll keep raking in the cash from this sort of thing.
 
tamarin
#8
Well, being in a segment would certainly be one of those secrets so many of us keep. It would be embarrassing to suddenly find yourself famous in your town. Might even be a marriage breaker later on. It's a little like the Mel Gibson brouhaha. Did drink simply allow him to be what he really is?
 
karrie
#9
Quote: Originally Posted by tamarinView Post

Well, being in a segment would certainly be one of those secrets so many of us keep. It would be embarrassing to suddenly find yourself famous in your town. Might even be a marriage breaker later on. It's a little like the Mel Gibson brouhaha. Did drink simply allow him to be what he really is?

yeah.... I'd keep that secret too. And the drinking is exactly why they don't get acknowledged in court as having been victimized. In any other law issue I've read about, contracts signed while drunk are invalid. But, for some reason the releases these girls sign (if they sign any at all) are honored by the courts.
 
Cannuck
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by karrieView Post

They're victims, yet not really victims in the eyes of many.

Do you believe that being drunk makes them a victim?
 
karrie
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Do you believe that being drunk makes them a victim?

yep. there's a reason you're supposed to be sober when you sign contracts.
 
Cannuck
#12
You are speaking in a legal sense. I am not.

But let's discuss the legalities of it. I think if you can be held accountable for your actions when you get behind the wheel drunk, you can be held accountable when you sign a contract drunk. The law may consider one a victim and one not. That just means the law is unfair,
 
karrie
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

You are speaking in a legal sense. I am not.

In a non legal sense, sending women into a club to get others drunk and egg them on to strip for a camera is victimizing yes. You impair their judgement, and send in a peer to make it seem that what they're doing is fun and perfectly okay. Is it the worst way in which people have been victimized? no. But, it is still taking advantage.
 
Cannuck
#14
The number one rule of sales is "people buy emotionally and justify logically". A good salesperson impairs the targets judgement by invoking emotional responses. Who really needs a Corvette or a 72" TV?

I have a different opinion on the term victimization obviously. For me, nobody is forcing these women to drink and they are responsible for their actions just like the drunk driver.
 
temperance
#15
Ithink its free promotion the fine thing --thats it
 
MagnoliaApples
#16
I agree with Cannuck.

The way i see it, these girls are victimizing themselves. You would have to be extremely drunk to be at the state where you don't remember anything. Also, if i was at a bar and there was some chick who was fun and cute and was trying to get me drunk and then asking me to show my t#ts to some guy with a camera, i'd tell her to take a flying leap off a steep cliff!

These girls who are signing their names on a disclaimer know what they're doing. Plus getting paid for it!! Come on! Sounds exactly like what it is. A negotiation. I'll give you money if you show me your t#ts. It's more like low level prostitution if you ask me.
 
mapleleafgirl
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

The number one rule of sales is "people buy emotionally and justify logically". A good salesperson impairs the targets judgement by invoking emotional responses. Who really needs a Corvette or a 72" TV?

I have a different opinion on the term victimization obviously. For me, nobody is forcing these women to drink and they are responsible for their actions just like the drunk driver.

but when someone is drunk how can they control their feelings and behaviour? i think these guys take advantage of them when they are drunk and they dont know any better
 
tracy
#18
I feel little sympathy for people who claim they were too drunk to be able to control themselves. If it isn't an excuse for drunk driving, why would it be an excuse for stripping and making out with some other girl? Taking advantage of a drinker isn't illegal because the drinker should have known better.
 
MagnoliaApples
#19
How could you not know any better???

It doesn't matter how drunk you are. They tell you what they want you to do then you have to sign your name on a disclaimer and then you do what ever. Then you get paid.

They're not doing this to 13 year olds. These girls are 18 and up. Even if you're 17 and you don't drink alot, you would still know that you are going to get paid to get naked and whatever else. Have you seen any of these video's?

These girls are doing this because they want to. They think that it would be fun and they decide that they'll go for it. Please do not turn around and say you've been victimized just because, the morning after, you realize that what you've done is embarrassing and that you're parents will kill you if they find out. These girls are victimizing themselves.

The only thing that i see being hurt here are these girls' pride.
 
Colpy
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by MagnoliaApplesView Post

How could you not know any better???

It doesn't matter how drunk you are. They tell you what they want you to do then you have to sign your name on a disclaimer and then you do what ever. Then you get paid.

They're not doing this to 13 year olds. These girls are 18 and up. Even if you're 17 and you don't drink alot, you would still know that you are going to get paid to get naked and whatever else. Have you seen any of these video's?

These girls are doing this because they want to. They think that it would be fun and they decide that they'll go for it. Please do not turn around and say you've been victimized just because, the morning after, you realize that what you've done is embarrassing and that you're parents will kill you if they find out. These girls are victimizing themselves.

The only thing that i see being hurt here are these girls' pride.

Exactly.

The idea that any woman that does something sexual that is out of the ordinary must have been "exploited" is simply silly, to say nothing of incredibly condescending.

In my experience, women have a much better imagination than men, and have more little "twists". (God, I do love them!)
 
tamarin
#21
All I hope is that the participants are kept away from children. Given what they'll do in public and on camera to boot, I can only imagine how over the top their behaviour is when it's not being monitored. That's the bottom line: ya wanna be wild? Just stay away from the flippin' kids.
That's not too much to ask.
 
MagnoliaApples
#22
Yes. Stay away from the kids. You wanna know what's sad though? Do you know how many teenagers lie about their age just so they can do what they want? Like date an older guy or even just to have sex with someone they think is 'hot' and 'experienced'?

I have to admit that in some cases i don't always have much sympathy for the girls. Although there are many female teenaged victims out there that don't deserve what happens to them, there are some that purposefully put themselves in very compromising situations and want to do 'bad' things because of many reasons that they are conscious or not conscious of. And when things start to get out of control, the only thing they know how to do is pull out the victim card. And that's not right!

If a girl who is 16 lies and says she's 18 or 19, who is to blame in that situation?

I think we need to redefine the word teenager. I personally think that teens from the ages 16 or 17 to 21 should be called young adults because at this time, they are already doing and getting into things that would normally be called adult activity.

Times are a changin'. 20 years ago, they figured teenagers were losing their virginities around the ages of 16,17, and 18. Today the common age is 13!!!! 13 people!
I find this is too young but when you consider that a teenager has already reached their sexual awakening at the age of 13, by the time they are 18, i'm sure they think they already know what there is to know.

It's tough topic. Is a person still considered a 'child' when they are sexually active? How can you protect someone from something when they already have an idea of what it is all about?
 
tamarin
#23
We do live in strange times. Biologically, we're in full acceleration. It's common now to see a 12 year old girl who would have passed for 16 to 18 back in the 60's. By 18 they're well past their peak. Yet mentally I think they've regressed. We've always had wild girls but we've never had so many as we do today. It's certainly feminism' most embarrassing moment. We have all these empowered girls running about and no clear role model of what to do with it. A vacuum is usually filled. And this one is no exception: in the absence of supportive role models the media industry has supplied them. Ain't it wonderful.
 
karrie
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by MagnoliaApplesView Post

I agree with Cannuck.

The way i see it, these girls are victimizing themselves. You would have to be extremely drunk to be at the state where you don't remember anything. Also, if i was at a bar and there was some chick who was fun and cute and was trying to get me drunk and then asking me to show my t#ts to some guy with a camera, i'd tell her to take a flying leap off a steep cliff!

These girls who are signing their names on a disclaimer know what they're doing. Plus getting paid for it!! Come on! Sounds exactly like what it is. A negotiation. I'll give you money if you show me your t#ts. It's more like low level prostitution if you ask me.

They don't get paid. The only ones who get paid are the women who egg it on.
 
Cannuck
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by mapleleafgirlView Post

but when someone is drunk how can they control their feelings and behaviour?

Then you must also believe drunk driving laws are unfair because they can't control their feelings or behaviors either.
 
hermanntrude
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by tamarinView Post

I saw an investigative report segment on this last year. The video series hires young women to move around at holiday spots and find girls willing to peel it off. According to the report such girls are paid but those who are filmed are not. It seems the girls found lots of takers. It's amazing to think of how easily young women are encouraged to be a little if not a lot sexually brazen. ABC. Reminds me of the hardcore film producer called George who simply walked the streets of cities in the US and asked strangers to have sex with him. Plenty did. And on film. Is there something about the camera that makes many women suddenly want to become porn stars? Is the law missing out on something here?

in my experience, if you can take the rejection, if you ask enough people, eventually one will do it.
 
selfactivated
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by tracyView Post

I feel little sympathy for people who claim they were too drunk to be able to control themselves. If it isn't an excuse for drunk driving, why would it be an excuse for stripping and making out with some other girl? Taking advantage of a drinker isn't illegal because the drinker should have known better.


Im with you Tracy. My friend just got back from florida from one of those things and he has a camera full off willing shots. The whole thing is like Marde Gras. If their drunk their over 21 and adult enough to make their own desitions.
 
Toro
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

The number one rule of sales is "people buy emotionally and justify logically". A good salesperson impairs the targets judgement by invoking emotional responses. Who really needs a Corvette or a 72" TV?

I need a 72" TV to watch the Girls Gone Wild tapes!
 
Toro
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Then you must also believe drunk driving laws are unfair because they can't control their feelings or behaviors either.

I'm an excellent driver when I'm drunk!
 
tamarin
#30
Could the Girls Gone Wild coverage on the major networks, coupled with continuing sensationalist coverage of female teachers in the States molesting students signal a changing of the guard? We're used to seeing perversion as a male failing. Now the tables have been turned. And mightily. Is this a good news story, another male bastion that's fallen to equal rights?
 
no new posts