Video Store Clerk Convicted of Pandering Obscenity (New Fine Arts)

[Snowman]

Today on ADT, I saw a post by "Nate Glass." The thread was called, "Is it Legal to Shoot Porn in Houston?" In response to that question, I posted the following:

"California is the only state to date where a high court expressly has given the green light to porn. If you shoot in any other state, you may find yourself facing criminal charges. It's unlikely, but it could happen. The charge would most likely be pandering."

Just to show you how uptight some jurisdictions can be, here's what Nate had to say on this topic:

I went to jail 11 times and have 9 counts of Pandering Obscenity on my permanent criminal record. You might say that I was lucky and was only an "in and out" prisoner which means I spent no more than 4-5 hours in jail each time, but I was strip searched and on one occasion I was leg-shackled to another prisoner. And I was just a clerk at a porn store that sold completely legal stuff. There were clerks there longer than me that have 30 to 40 charges on their record. Probably 1/2 my charges were Nylon videos that one particular vice cop liked to buy. I've been denied renting apartments and turned down from jobs because of that criminal record. That's Texas for ya! Luckily there was a recent major decision in Reliable Consultants (Dreamers) / PHE Inc (Adam & Eve) vs. Earle, that made selling obscene devices legal throughout the 5th circuit. So maybe the porn clerks of the future won't have to go through this mess.

He also commented in another post, "I did work for New Fine Arts, and they did pay all the legal fees, but at the beginning we were encouraged to plead No Contest. I don't think they foresaw the long term effects of our convictions (renting, jobs, etc). Once the clerks brought in a great new attorney to defend us, we won every case, and the city of Dallas has subsequently stopped harassing the store."

When I was in college, I worked at a major music/video chain retailer that rented porn. I certainly never considered the possibility of this sort of thing happening to me at the time.

It blows my mind that this sort of thing is still happening in America today.

[ginko23]

Confused….I need a lawyer.

How can prostitution be legal in Nevada but not shooting porn? Seems to me if I legally can hire a girl for sex why would I not be able to pay male talent to have sex with the same girl and film it?

In California why can’t I hire a girl thru an agency for personal sex and say I was doing work for a website making prostitution legal?

If “the law” wants to harass someone they can do it with or without a high court decision. So even in California they, “the law”, could make an issue out of anything, can’t they?

If no high court in say New York has ever made a ruling on an issue and a high court in California has, isn’t there a precedence thing where you are covered.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by ginko23 Confused….I need a lawyer. How can prostitution be legal in Nevada but not shooting porn? Seems to me if I legally can hire a girl for sex why would I not be able to pay male talent to have sex with the same girl and film it? In California why can’t I hire a girl thru an agency for personal sex and say I was doing work for a website making prostitution legal? If “the law” wants to harass someone they can do it with or without a high court decision. So even in California they, “the law”, could make an issue out of anything, can’t they? If no high court in say New York has ever made a ruling on an issue and a high court in California has, isn’t there a precedence thing where you are covered.

In Nevada, since prostitution is legal in most counties, I imagine a court would agree it is legal to shoot porn, however since there are no cases on the matter, it's just an educated guess. It's notable that prostitution is not allowed in the counties where the two largest cities are, Vegas and Reno.

California courts consider a bonafide porn shoot a performance intended to be enjoyed by the viewing audience at home. In California, this was settled with People v. Freeman (1988) 46 Cal.3d 419. Hal Freeman directed and produced the groundbreaking "Caught From Behind" series that featured anal sex. This upset a lot of people and made him a legal target. The prosecution stemmed from the production of the second installment in the series. In reaching it's decision, the court noted that payment was made to the actors, not for the sexual gratification or arousal of Freeman. The court also held that since the content was not obscene, it was entitled to First Amendment protection.

In contrast, if you hire a starlet through an agency under false pretenses (i.e. don't really intend to create a commercial adult entertainment product) then we are slipping back into the illegal realm of sex for pay. You would be participating directly in the sexual conduct and without footage, no First Amendment protection would arise.

Courts of different states can and do rule differently on similar issues. If a similar porn pandering case arises in New York (or more likely Florida) it would be considered a case of "first impression." In cases of first impression a court often will consider what other states have done but they are not bound to follow them. The high court in California has no direct bearing on other states.

BTW, Caught From Behind III (from 1984) is now available on Videobox.