From AVN.com
Chief Clerk
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
333 Constitution Ave.
Washington, D.C.
By FAX
To Whom It May Concern:
As a journalist, I write to register my dismay at the conduct of the trial in U.S. v. John Stagliano, et al. case, which is currently being tried before Judge Richard J. Leon.
As a journalist, I have covered three previous federal obscenity cases—U.S. v. Little (Middle Dist. of Fla.), U.S. v. JM Productions (Dist. of Ariz.) and U.S. v. Isaacs (Central Dist. of Calif.)—and in all of those cases, reporters were permitted to attend all phases of the trial, including the jury selection, during which the jurors were all referred to by their juror number in order to protect their privacy.
However, in the Stagliano case, Judge Leon closed the courtroom while the attorneys were discussing the written jury questionnaires and questioning individual prospective jurors based on their answers in the questionnaires. It has been my experience that prospective jurors’ answers to counsels’ questions can be very informative of their backgrounds and mindsets, and as a reporter, I believe I should have had access to that information as background for my coverage of the trial, and that Judge Leon’s order amounted to a violation of the First Amendment’s "freedom of the press" clause.
Further, it is my understanding that during the trial itself, Judge Leon will not permit the playing of any portion of the charged allegedly obscene videos to anyone except counsel, the witness, the jury and two selected local journalists, of which I am not one. The TVs on which the videos will be played will be turned away from the courtroom spectators and reporters, and the jury will be issued headphones through which to hear the dialogue on the videos, effectively preventing several members of the press and the general public from viewing and hearing the charged material. Not only do I believe the press has a right to see and hear this evidence, but I also believe the prevention of the press and the public from seeing and hearing the portions of the DVDs will imply to the jury that there is something wrong with the material, thereby giving undue weight to the prosecution’s case and unduly prejudicing the defense.
I have come all the way from California to cover this important legal proceeding, and I hope you will take these issues seriously and ask Judge Leon to follow proper procedure and allow the press access to these important portions of this trial.
Yours truly,
Mark Kernes, Senior Editor
AVN Media Network
Herbie is right…for once. This is a bullshit proceeding. There are some real criminals in porn, but John isnt one of them. Of course we are in a country where the constitutional right to carry a gun trumps my constitutional right not to be shot.
It seems the outcome of this trial is already decided; eventually they’re going to throw the book at John Stagliano, hoping and/or thinking by doing so, they’ll make an example out of him for the rest of pornographers. It’s a failed scare tactic which hasn’t worked in the past and won’t be working today; but let them try and waste more time and tax payer dollars.
I wish the best for John Stagliano and Co.
Off topic, but after watching Shelley/Roxy’s Gang Bang from 15 years ago, she looks better now. She did take quite a dicking. As for the guys I would have to look them up, aside from Guy DiSilva and Ian Daniels, Guy wearing a bandana and Ian with his fine ponytail.
Reading Mark Kernes articles about this case is always good for a laugh. He has noted all of the governments misconduct(not playing entire movies, excluding expert witnesses,the racial make up of the jury and showing the scene with the black performer,not allowing unfettered access to jounalists) that could be ground for appeal.
But like the Colonel says,,,,”…this trial is already decided.” And that may very well be true……..So here lies the rub,,,,,,,Yes, he will be found guilty, but the judge has PURPOSELY given all of the grounds for an appeal,,,,,an appeal that may reach the Supreme COurt(which still has a conservative majority),,,,and then the Supreme Court can uphold the conviction and all of the methods used by this prosecution to get this conviction.
Jerry, havent your sources informed you of this conspiracy to take this all the way to the Supreme Court, and reaffirm the obscentity laws based on ‘community standards?’
And do Stagliano’s attorneys think that showing MORE of these videos will actually HELP his client? I would think that a mere ‘description’ of the content, which the judge has ruled is enough to satisfy the Miller tests, would be more beneficial to the DEFENSE.
And without seeing the videos, some jurors may think that they cant find him guilty without having seen the entire “peice of art”
But these are the same lawyers who tried to get interviews that Stagliano did admitted as EVIDENCE. The judge laughed that right out of court and simply said, he can take the stand himself if he wants his words eneted as evidence.
And isnt Stagliano charged with ‘distributing’ obscenity?
Could it be that once these ‘works of art'(lol) have been declared obscene then they might go after the ‘producer’ of the obscene material?
/
Joe, you ignorant slut (j/k, in case you get sensitive…)
First off, the presiding judge is leaving nothing for an appeal. Even though he’s screwing Mr. Buttman, all of his decisions thus far are within his discretionary rights as a neutral overseer of the trial. Nothing that is clearly improper has taken place.
Second, the trial is in DC which is a liberal city which might produce a more open-minded jury. Alsom the obscene material in question is not as extreme compared to other obscenity slam dunks (Kahn Tusion’s “Meatholes” and Raul Cristian’s “Tamed Teens” come into mind). It is very likely that Buttman would be acquitted. Material that depict violence are obscenity slam dunks. The titles in question are not.
Third, the defense wants to show more of the selected video scenes to ESTABLISH CONTEXT and thus prove that the material in question is of artistic substance and value.
Fourth, the Supreme Court is NOT majority conservative. Its split down the middle.
Conservatives:
Roberts
Alito
Thomas
Scalia
Liberals:
Breyer
Sotomayor
Ginsburg
Kagan (she’s basically in already)
Swing vote: Kennedy (see Lawrence v. Texas and re-examine your notion that the Supreme Court would re-affirm the community standards rule)
Origen, you fucking moron,
Didnt you see my reference to Steele in my above post. The whole conspiracy thing I wrote above was a joke aimes at Steele.
Stagliano will be convicted, his appeals will be denied, and if not denied entirely they will be held up by the cour of appeals.
And the black majority of black people in D.C. are ‘church going’ people.
I actually agree with your first paragraph,”Nothing that is clearly improper has taken place.”
You have to remember, the jury is full of regular people, not porn junkies. In his closing argument the prosecutor will ask the jury if they think shooting enemas out of their asses into somebody elses mouth is obscene. Then he will ask them if it is ‘art’. When the jury considers these questions they will check the guilty box on the form. Just my oinion,,,we will all know very soon.
Origen, perhaps you could explain to us what is ‘artistic’ about these videos.
If someone takes a picture of a pile of shit and puts it in frame on his wall is that art,,,or is it just a picture of a pile of shit?
Yeah origen, regular people would never watch porn.
Joe, you pompous old douchebag that won’t go down the toilet…
I KNOW you were addressing Steele in a tongue in cheek manner. It was the PREMISE and the MANNER in which you were ridiculing Steele that I was exposing as pure bullshit.
One, Buttman won’t be convicted. The majority of the black people in DC are church going people? What the fuck does that have to do with anything? Black people do not constitute the majority of jurors neither do “church going people”. Like you said, the jurors have been screened to make sure that they are “regular people” and regular people (unlike you) are mature enough to understand the notion that even if they don’t find milk enemas to be in their taste, the practice is filmed by consenting adults FOR consenting consenting adults–and there nothing excessively abhorrent about it! This is America, many people have different sexual tastes. The great thing about this country in this day in age is that it’s commonly accepted that consenting people can do what they want behind close doors. This concept explains the level of acceptance of pornography in our culture. Pornography is NOT on trial here, sir, but rather the quesiton of whether or not the selected content “crosses the line” from a community’s point of view.
Second, what’s artistic about this video? This video depicts consential human sexuality which is just as natural as other forms of expression–like dance. The title been produced in an organzed manner that follows all the principles of art as it relates to film. There is unity in the piece with a beginning, middle, and end. There is visual variety in the piece with expressive uses of color,lighting, constuming, and set construction. Camera angles exhibit balance and videographic professionalism. The acts depicted in the film involve repitition but are switched up enough to provide constrast. Dialogue is used in an improvitational manner but, nethertheless, is expressed selectively to enhance he erotic quality of the piece.
As for your question on whether or not framed shit is art–have you ever heard of dada or abstract art? Just because the subject of the picture is shit, doesn’t mean the work is shit.
As for your ridicule of Steele and his conspiracy theories my above post thrashed your logic as it relates to the appeals process and the Supreme Court.
And porn junkie? Really? Please don’t tell me you believe in the myth of porn addiction…
Oh yeah, and prosecution will rest its case tomorrow. So much for a surefire conviction, eh joe?
Why do you leave out the part about squirting the enema out of one ass idrectly into the mouth of the other person?
And i dont believe any ‘addiction; is an illness…..but someone who would rather watch porn, and does so everyday, and limits his contact with others ino order to get his ‘fix’ is in my opinio a porn junkei.
The best way to illustrate this is to make it personal…..Would you want your daughter to date a guy who watches porn everyday,and spends money on porn everyday, and keeps porn in the house? Would you think that this is something she should be concerned about when evalutating her relationship?
And so squiring an enema out of your ass into someones mouth is..”just as natural as other forms of expression.”
And just becuase something is ‘common’ does not mean it is accptable. Heroin is very common in New Yrok city. Murder is commited thouands of times a year in the U.S. Pedophiles abuse children everyday. All of these things are common, but not legal. This type of porn may be common, that doesnt, by default, make it legal. If SO MANY people agree with your view on this issue, then get the laws changed. Elect like minded people and change the law. The problem you run into with this is that the Christian right is very well organized, and they work TOGHETHER to acheive their goals. And they have been very successful.
Trying to convince a jury that squirting an enema out of ones ass into anothers mouth is a ‘common’practice, and expression of “sexual” preference is laughable.
And there are ten black people on the jury, I would say that constitutes a majority. What do you call it Origen?
And for the record, I think obscentiy prosecutions are ludicrous, and when I vote, I look for people who have similar opinions as I do. I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the end your right to say it. I dont agree with obscentiy laws, but it is THE LAW. But I just dont see anyone of the ‘left’ with the balls to try to get the laws changed. The gutless left in this country is all to willing to let free speech be trounced in order to save political face. Nobody on the left has the guts to try to overturn these laws, lest the right brand themas ‘pro pornography.” No one on the left has the balls to make that political stand.
And again, why do they always leave out the part about squirting the enema into someone else’s mouth when describing these videos. An ommison of convieneince.
I assure you, my omission of the fact that the enemas are squirted into another person’s mouth was purely inadvertent.
The problem with your analogy about porn is that its terribly misguided. Though I vehemently don’t believe that adult material is healthy for young adolescents, there are tons of people who would rather spend excessive time and money playing World of Warcraft or any other kind of hobby. These are people with obsessions and the hobby they are obsessed with are not to blame.
As a corollary to your “what if it were your daughter/sister” scenario, I would have to say that as long as a there relationship of mutual love, openness and consent and as long as the CHARACTER of the man is conducive to my daughter’s happiness, who the fuck am I to judge whether or not he would be a good mate. Additionally, who the fuck am I to decide what my daughter/sister does in her sex life.
Yeah porn is common and it is accepted. That’s why the adult industry in the US is the largest in the world. People aren’t taken to jail for possessing porn. People are able to openly to purchase porn. Even the “strong political forces” of the Christian right (which is a myth BTW) do not make it a priority to outlaw consumer access to porn. Numerous studies have confirmed that porn alone has no adverse effect on behavior and that porn MAY (though not always) be conducive to enhancing sex lives.
And when you say THE LAW’S THE LAW when it comes to obscenity, what on earth do you mean by that given how subjective “community standards” are? In this discussion you are biased in your own opinions about what obscenity is that you are sure of a Buttman conviction. Heck, you practically demand it. What happens if he is acquitted?
And people on both the liberal and libertarian ends of the political spectrum defend porn. Most notably, the ACLU. However, there is no broad-based support for porn, just as there is no broad-based support for shit paintings. But its growing. Porn is not a monolith either, BTW, there are material out there that are truly obscene–even stuff that Buttman distributes. Depictions of extreme violence against women immediately come to mind….
…But girls squirting milk enemas into other girl’s mouths and then giggling? Obscene? Don’t make me laugh.