Max Hardcore Indicted by USA Gov't

<sarcasm> Never saw that coming. </sarcasm>

Mess with the bull, get the horns. Not a difficult concept to grasp.

I hope like fuck he wins and I'm not at all a fan of either him or his material.

But what I can't stand is the powers that be trying to enforce "community standards" inside of a private home. I can understand "community standards" coming into play if one were to drag the TV and a recliner out to the front yard and watch the DVD there - but inside a private residence?

If that's allowed, I can't wait for the day when Jewish or Islamic religions win a battle against any Christian literature or television show being allowed in public that would offend them. With the removal of "Merry Christmas" from many advertising literature in lieu of "Happy Holidays" - or the removal of Christmas trees - maybe that day isn't too far away...

If we're going to enforce "community standards" on one end of the spectrum, it's only right to enforce it on the other end as well.

If you want to understand the impact of Max's indictment and what it means to the rest of the adult internet, you'd profit by thinking of the likely answers to these questions:

1. Why Max Hardcore?

2. Why Tampa (rather than Mississippi, Alabama, rural Georgia, or the Western District of Pennsylvania)?

3. Why now?

This thread contains an above-average amount of misinformation about this situation and the history of Max's dealings with the law. Dangerously misleading misinformation.

Some have said about Max that he served as a tripwire to protect the less aggressive content produced by others. That tripwire has now been crossed by the USDOJ.

JD

If you want to understand the impact of Max's indictment and what it means to the rest of the adult internet, you'd profit by thinking of the likely answers to these questions:

1. Why Max Hardcore?

2. Why Tampa (rather than Mississippi, Alabama, rural Georgia, or the Western District of Pennsylvania)?

3. Why now?

This thread contains an above-average amount of misinformation about this situation and the history of Max's dealings with the law. Dangerously misleading misinformation.

Some have said about Max that he served as a tripwire to protect the less aggressive content produced by others. That tripwire has now been crossed by the USDOJ.

JD

hmm.... "1) why max hardcore".......

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showpo...19&postcount=1

"I spoke to Max today and he wanted to make it clear that "Max World Entertainment is going to fight this tooth and nail and will not back down without a fight." Max's greeting from Barcelona to the FBI is "Fuck You". It should have been "Go Fuck Yourself" but thats the quote he gave me."

============

i can't believe he's 50 -

Sounds like a great place for a porn convention...

convictions and investigations take a while, here's one initiated during the Clinton years:


U.S. Department of Justice

United States Attorney
Northern District of Texas

1100 Commerce St., 3rd Fl.
Dallas, Texas 75242-1699






Telephone (214) 659-8600
Fax (214) 767-0978


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
DALLAS, TEXAS

CONTACT: 214/659-8600
www.usdoj.gov/usao/txn
MARCH 13, 2006




FEDERAL JURY CONVICTS TWO MEN IN OBSCENITY TRIAL

Defendants Sold Rape/Torture Videos on Internet

Two defendants, Clarence Thomas ?Tom? Gartman and former Houston Police Officer Brent Alan McDowell, were convicted today by a federal jury in Dallas for their part in the operation of a business that sold obscene videos on the Internet, announced Assistant Attorney General Alice S. Fisher of the Justice Department?s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney Richard B. Roper of the Northern District of Texas.

U.S. Attorney Roper said, ?With these convictions, six defendants in three different cases have been convicted in the Northern District of Texas in recent months of distributing obscene material. We will continue to work closely with the Criminal Division?s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section and Obscenity Prosecution Task Force to ensure that those who traffic in obscenity are brought to justice.?

Gartman, 35, was convicted on one count of conspiracy to distribute obscene materials and one count of mailing obscene materials and aiding and abetting. McDowell, 37, was convicted of one count of mailing obscene matter and aiding and abetting. The third defendant on trial, Lou Anthony Santilena, 32, was acquitted of all charges. All three defendants had been charged in an indictment returned by a federal grand jury in Dallas in May 2004.

Gartman faces a maximum statutory sentence of 10 years imprisonment and a $500,000 fine and McDowell faces a maximum statutory sentence of five years imprisonment and a $250,000 fine. Gartman and McDowell are U.S. citizens who were living in Canada at the time of the indictment. They both currently reside in the Las Vegas, Nevada area. Both Gartman and McDowell remain on bond. They are scheduled to be sentenced by the Honorable Barefoot Sanders, United States Senior District Judge, on June 15, 2006.

The government provided evidence at trial that beginning in 1998, Gartman, McDowell and others maintained a website on the Internet, "forbiddenvideos.com." The "forbiddenvideos website was used to advertise and distribute obscene videos by VHS cassettes, CD-Roms and streaming video, including videos depicting rape scenes, sexual torture and excretory functions in conjunction with sex acts. The government presented evidence at trial that the defendants posted graphic descriptions of the obscene materials on the "forbiddenvideos.com" website. The obscene videos ordered from the website were initially sent by U.S. mail and United Postal Service from locations within the Northern District of Texas. Later, the defendants also distributed the obscene videos through a collection of websites managed from the Northern District of Texas and elsewhere, which enabled customers in the United States and throughout the world, to download obscene digital video images or to view digital streaming video. Customers of the "forbiddenvideos.com" website, or related websites, would place orders and pay for the obscene videos by check, credit card, or through a PayPal account.

The defendants? website operation was identified during an investigation into similar activities of Garry Layne Ragsdale and his wife, Tamara Michelle Ragsdale. Gartman and the Ragsdales were partners in a business distributing obscene videos until a dispute arose between them in early 1998 which dissolved the partnership. The Ragsdales were convicted in federal court in Dallas on October 23, 2003 on obscenity charges related to the obscene video business they conducted after their partnership with Gartman ended. On March 5, 2004, the Honorable Sidney A. Fitzwater, United States District Judge, sentenced Garry Ragsdale to 33 months in prison and Tamara Ragsdale to 30 months in prison. Their convictions were upheld by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals last year. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the Ragsdales? case in February 2006.

In order to prove a matter is ?obscene,? the jury was required to satisfy a three-part test: (1) that the work appeals predominantly to prurient interest; (2) that it depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way; and (3) that the material, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. An appeal to ?prurient? interest is an appeal to a morbid, degrading, and unhealthy interest in sex, as distinguished from a mere candid interest in sex. This three-part test is a result of rulings by the United States Supreme Court in 1973 and 1976.

U. S. Attorney Roper praised the investigative efforts of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service, the Dallas Police Department Vice Squad, along with the Canadian Border Services Agency and the Lethbridge, Canada Police Services. The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Linda C. Groves and DOJ Obscenity Prosecution Task Force Trial Attorney Richard D. Green. The task force was established last year by the Justice Department Criminal Division to focus on the prosecution of adult obscenity nationwide.

Okay, why does the indictment have two attorneys that are with child protection? Was there something in the content warranting the actions of a child protection division? Were the DVDs sent to minors?

Something doesn't make sense here.

Child Protection and Obscenity are 1 division....theres no red flag there

Thats BULLSHIT

It was only a matter of time... I'm sure the feds have wanted to bust him for a good long time.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...31071max1.html

Xbiz and AVN both get beaten to the news punch by the smoking gun.

Interesting that they filed this case in Tampa Bay...

Name them I will wait.Janet Reno herself said I didnt go after obscenity because if it is consenting adults, there were more pressing priorities to deal with.

I hope the people who shoot locally in Tampa are untouched by this situation.

If anyone reading is is DUMB enough to think that Democrats are porn friendly you're an idiot. They would sell us out in a second if there were one ounce of political gain in it.

There were at least 6 federal obscenity prosecutions under Janet Reno/Bill Clinton. Clinton signed COPA into law too dont forget.

If anyone reading is is DUMB enough to think that Democrats are porn friendly you're an idiot. They would sell us out in a second if there were one ounce of political gain in it.

Only Ron Paul ( A Libertarian in Republican clothing) acknowledges our right to even exist. Thats where my vote ids going as of now.

I mean wake the hell up. Forget all this free speech and freedom to express yourself bullshit ... when the hell did common sense fly out the window ?