Is Someone About To Get Prosecuted For 2257 Violations? Did anyone catch this? - GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

X

BoyAlley

So Fucking Gay

Join Date: Nov 2004

Posts: 19714
Share

Post
#1

Is Someone About To Get Prosecuted For 2257 Violations? Did anyone catch this?

07-31-2007, 09:19 PM

I haven't seen this Xbiz article mentioned on here, maybe I missed it:

Keeping Line Open on 2257
http://www.xbiz.com/articles/82414/2257

There's a lot of great clarification packed in that article, so check it out if you haven't already. I was pretty impressed with how forthcoming the FBI was in this interview.

Also interesting to note at the end:

Joyner = FBI

Joyner: On a related note, I did want to mention some re-inspections that have occurred. If a company has no violations, we are unable to inspect them again for at least four months. Some companies have violations and failed to resolve them. This is bad and leads to a re-inspection. If they continue to have violations, this indicates a deliberate disregard of the law.

XBIZ: You mentioned that "some re-inspections have occurred" and "some companies have violations and failed to resolve them." To clarify, have there been re-inspections wherein the producer failed to resolve violations noted in their initial inspection?

Joyner: Yes.

(Note: Joyner could not discuss further these re-inspections, or the unresolved violations, as they pertain to specific inspections, and Joyner is not authorized to discuss specific inspections in detail.)

Sounds to me like a company may be thumbing their nose at the Feds, or be unable to comply for some reason? Reading between the lines, whoever this is, they're not making the DOJ very happy.

The article makes it sound like the FEDs were trying to give this company every chance to get into compliance and it's not happening for whatever reason.

Might we be hearing about a prosecution soon?

Last edited by BoyAlley; 07-31-2007, 09:22 PM.
Tags: None
pocketkangaroo

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2005

Posts: 8452
Share

Post
#2

07-31-2007, 09:20 PM

Is this the same DOJ that is led by a guy who commits perjury and fires people who aren't loyal Bushies?
Comment
Tempest

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: May 2004

Posts: 10217
Share

Post
#3

07-31-2007, 09:45 PM

Oh good.. Some idiots are going to cause problems and end up putting everything under the spotlight of the media and give all the politicians more ammunition.
Comment
GatorB

The Demon & 12clicks

Join Date: Oct 2001

Posts: 18208
Share

Post
#4

07-31-2007, 10:23 PM

Originally posted by Tempest

Oh good.. Some idiots are going to cause problems and end up putting everything under the spotlight of the media and give all the politicians more ammunition.

Isn't Bushie your boy? Next time join the team that fight for YOUR rights. Not the rights of Jesus freaks.
Comment
Casa Nova

Confirmed User

Join Date: Mar 2007

Posts: 2867
Share

Post
#5

07-31-2007, 10:35 PM

The article seems really interesting. I wonder what will come of it.. the first big case for violations will make mainstream news for sure.

ICQ: 405 009 573
Comment
Matt 26z

So Fucking Banned

Join Date: Apr 2002

Posts: 18481
Share

Post
#6

07-31-2007, 10:36 PM

Originally posted by BoyAlley

Sounds to me like a company may be thumbing their nose at the Feds, or be unable to comply for some reason?

"Some companies have violations and failed to resolve them."

So it's more than one. Funny thing is, everyone who has been inspected has been on the boards or the adult news sites claiming to have passed with flying colors.
Comment
sicone

Retired

Join Date: Jan 2004

Posts: 18453
Share

Post
#7

07-31-2007, 10:45 PM

will be interesting to follow this in the coming months.
Comment
bausch

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jul 2006

Posts: 3017
Share

Post
#8

07-31-2007, 10:55 PM

I think this is one of the companies:

"The FBI 2257 inspectors visited the offices of Robert Hill again last week to follow up on IDs that were missing during their first sweep a few months back. Once again, there were missing IDs. Time may be running out for them to get it straight before federal charges start accumulating."

http://lukeisback.com/bloglukeisback/?p=31
Comment
TheDoc

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Jul 2001

Posts: 13827
Share

Post
#9

07-31-2007, 10:58 PM

From the article:
"However, two producers have had records indicating two performers were underage at the time of filming. According to the identification on record, both were 16 years old on the production date.

Although additional investigation determined both performers were of legal age, it does demonstrate some producers' record-keeping is so poor they could negligently hire an underage performer."

Like they need any other reasons to proceed....

~TheDoc - ICQ7765825
It's all disambiguation
Comment
bausch

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jul 2006

Posts: 3017
Share

Post
#10

07-31-2007, 10:59 PM

Also, Gentlemen's Video didn't cross-reference their stuff

"The company's 2257 records weren't cross-referenced, which is a technical violation. The agents told the company to cross-reference the records, and Gentlemen's Video has hired a person to do so."

http://xbiz.com/news/news_piece.php?...&mi=all&q=2257
Comment
bausch

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jul 2006

Posts: 3017
Share

Post
#11

07-31-2007, 11:01 PM

Originally posted by TheDoc

From the article:
"However, two producers have had records indicating two performers were underage at the time of filming. According to the identification on record, both were 16 years old on the production date.

Although additional investigation determined both performers were of legal age, it does demonstrate some producers' record-keeping is so poor they could negligently hire an underage performer."

Like they need any other reasons to proceed....

Right after that is says

"Although additional investigation determined both performers WERE OF LEGAL AGE, it does demonstrate some producers' record-keeping is so poor they could negligently hire an underage performer."

So they weren't underage, the companies just didn't know how to keep good records.
Comment
pocketkangaroo

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jan 2005

Posts: 8452
Share

Post
#12

07-31-2007, 11:03 PM

Considering Girls Gone Wild got nothing more than a fine for their shooting of underage girls and not having IDs of tons of others, I can't fathom the punishment being too harsh.
Comment
Mr. Cool Ice

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2006

Posts: 1289
Share

Post
#13

07-31-2007, 11:06 PM

Good.

A few of the video companies had a LOT of violations. Who are they to think they are above the law?

One Love
NUR COOL UND GEIL
Comment
TheDoc

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: Jul 2001

Posts: 13827
Share

Post
#14

07-31-2007, 11:07 PM

Originally posted by bausch

Right after that is says

"Although additional investigation determined both performers WERE OF LEGAL AGE, it does demonstrate some producers' record-keeping is so poor they could negligently hire an underage performer."

So they weren't underage, the companies just didn't know how to keep good records.

The only need to show neglect.

~TheDoc - ICQ7765825
It's all disambiguation
Comment
gideongallery

Confirmed User

Join Date: Aug 2003

Posts: 7082
Share

Post
#15

07-31-2007, 11:13 PM

Originally posted by bausch

Right after that is says

"Although additional investigation determined both performers WERE OF LEGAL AGE, it does demonstrate some producers' record-keeping is so poor they could negligently hire an underage performer."

So they weren't underage, the companies just didn't know how to keep good records.

see i don't see how you could come to this conclusion the only way in which
1. the ids were valid
2. they could have been 16 at the time of production
3. and further investigation determined both performers were of legal age

would be if the production date on file was miss marked by 2 years.

nothing about that circumstance demonstrates that they could negligently hire an underage performer since at the time of shoot they would have/did do the math correctly.

“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak
Comment
bloggingseo

Confirmed User

Join Date: May 2007

Posts: 1793
Share

Post
#16

07-31-2007, 11:14 PM

That is just blatant disregard and sloppy business :-(

Writing mainstream and adult since 2003
Hit me up ICQ 375089597
Comment
bausch

Confirmed User

Join Date: Jul 2006

Posts: 3017
Share

Post
#17

07-31-2007, 11:16 PM

Originally posted by gideongallery

see i don't see how you could come to this conclusion the only way in which
1. the ids were valid
2. they could have been 16 at the time of production
3. and further investigation determined both performers were of legal age

would be if the production date on file was miss marked by 2 years.

nothing about that circumstance demonstrates that they could negligently hire an underage performer since at the time of shoot they would have/did do the math correctly.

I have no idea what happened, what I quoted was directly from the article as stated by "Joyner" who is the fbi guy; he was the one who said the performers were of legal age and the company kept piss poor records.
Comment
bobby666

boots are my religion

Join Date: Nov 2005

Posts: 21765
Share

Post
#18

08-01-2007, 12:04 AM

thanks for the link
Comment
Tempest

Too lazy to set a custom title

Join Date: May 2004

Posts: 10217
Share

Post
#19

08-01-2007, 12:49 AM

Originally posted by GatorB

Isn't Bushie your boy? Next time join the team that fight for YOUR rights. Not the rights of Jesus freaks.

You've mistaken me for someone else..
Comment
Gnus

Confirmed User

Join Date: Feb 2005

Posts: 577
Share

Post
#20

08-01-2007, 03:47 AM

Originally posted by pocketkangaroo

Is this the same DOJ that is led by a guy who commits perjury and fires people who aren't loyal Bushies?

Sad part about Gonzales is if they do convict him of perjury or anything Bush will just pardon him anyway like he did Libby.

Gary

ICQ -73665782
Domains for sale - milfwatch.com $2k, pornnut.com $500, assforu.com $2K, xxxratedonly.com $1K
Comment
The Duck

Adult Content Provider

Join Date: May 2005

Posts: 18243
Share

Post
#21

08-01-2007, 04:13 AM

I bet those laws will reach europe real soon.

Skype Horusmaia
ICQ 41555245
Email [email protected]
Comment

Previous template Next

Working...