Chris Wilson Plea Deal w/ Prosecutors in Obscenity Case
 

Chris Wilson case is over...

https://www.ynot.com/modules.php?op=...rder=0&thold=0

conner, great seeing you last week :)

wow. not what i expected. tough area for obscenity. glad it worked out like that. so if he drops the iraqi war stuff, then there never woulda been a case is basically what i am interpreting it to be.

Ouch!
 

He's been through hell!

It would have been interesting to see this go to trial and have the prosecution lose BIG time!

Dave

Good to see he didn't get the book thrown at him

The state threatening rackateering charges is over the top.

The whole case is over the top.

Glad Chris can now live on without dealing with Polk County.

They railroaded the guy... I would have liked to see it go to trail and the prosecution lose but after the hell they put him thru he did what he had to do...

I donated a few bucks to him. Glad he is OK now.

haha the feds knew they didnt stand a chance in court..

Wtf did he plead no contest :mad:

how long is his probation?

Yup that certainly wont help us in the long run :(

Regards,

Lee

He should probably high tail it out of there or they'll just nail him again.

If he moves to another county or state, can he opperate the sites from there even though he is on probation in another county?.... Will they claim juristiction over the entire internet and follow him?

Damn he has to stay out of adult until his probation is over. Interesting.

first off for the millionth time this is nt the feds. Its a bad thing but I understand your a small fish what are you do? I doubt his lawyers were defending him for free. You see this is where the big fish should be stepping up , instead showing off cars and houses for their riches because they are going to hit little guys not big guys who can go to war. Everytime this happens it makes it easeir next time to get a obscenity conviction. Then when they go after the big guys it will be a walk in the park. I wish Chris the best in all he does.

Five years.

So I guess all this talk about supporting him so he could stand up for the adult industry was just a nice way of having everyone pay his legal bills?

ding ding ding!

I see your point... but in all honesty, I don't think he got much in the way of financial support. Some people helped, but not too many.

These types of legal battles are very expensive to fight.

I don't know how much money he had in his legal defense fund, but it goes quickly.

These cases cost $250,000+ to defend. If any lawyers on the board have better approximations, please correct me.

Glad he's out and everything is over with.. Pretty screwed up he has to dump the porn. I would move as far away from Polk county and then I'd turn that site into the biggest anti-Bush govt page out there.

I'd rub that shit in the govt's nose for violating my rights if I was him. It's a shame our legal system makes you guilty until proven innocent.

Good Luck, Chris....

Considering that Chris thumbed his nose at the authorities, tried to play cute, and got pinned down for doing it, he should be happy to get out the door for 5 counts with basically slap on wrist conditions. The only thing is the "no adult for 5 years", but to be fair, I don't think that adult is the issue. He keeps the rigth to use the Iraq pictures, so I think he has a plan or at least a hope in the mainstream world, if he chooses to stay online at all.

We should all be glad this didn't go to court, because there was enough of a chance that he could have been found guilty on a whole pile, and a judgement is way worse than no content plea for the rest of us.

Alex

that is a sweet offer cause they knew the case was weak

"Wilson can continue to offer the Iraqi war dead pictures after the initial 90 day period as long as he does not also offer adult entertainment."

Does that include penis pills?

Can somebody give me a short recap of the content he was publishing?

I will speak more on what was going on "behind the scenes" later to anyone that wants to listen. I do want to clear up a few things though.

1) This obscenity case was a fight I was willing to fight till the end. I believe I have done nothing wrong what-so-ever and sat in jail on two different occasions not knowing when I would be released, to accent that fact. There was so much more involved in this then a plain obscenity case. You have to understand the extreme hatered this sheriff and proscuter have for me and this line of work. The decision to take this deal was NOT an easy one even though it boiled down to basicaly a slap on the wrist it was still VERY hard decision to make. You have to know that thinking about the impact a negitive outcome could have caused this industry played a VERY big role in my decision as well.

2) The state was also about to file two seperate RICO charges against me. So I would be fighting in civil court as well as felony criminal court on both of those and still fighting 1 count in felony criminal court for obscenity and 300 counts relating to the various misdomenors also. This would have easily tied up the next 5+ years of my life with the end result possibly being prision for a very long time.

3) I at no point did I ever "try and play cute" or "thumb my nose" at anyone. I only did what most of you are doing here which is run/own and adult site. Yes I spoke to the press at first and I would do it again if they ask questions about my business. I am not hiding anything, they can ask me anything they want. I know some of you say you wouldn't talk to the press no matter what. That's fine but I also have to say that most of you saying that have never done anything worthy of the press talking to you. Think about that for a second.


4) I am not a HUSTLER, PLAYBOY, ADULT.COM etc but I was by no means barely making it in this industry. My site made VERY good money but as some of you know these cases are VERY VERY expensive and asking for donations to the fight was as much about letting people who believe this was a grave injustice show support as it was helping keep the fight financially going.

5) I have been through two Pentagon investagations, kicked out of my townhouse, sat in jail twice, my house raided, my business gone through with a fine tooth comb, several death threats, my personal and business computers shipped to the Pentagon to be forensicly searched through, stalked by the media and the consertive christian wierdos all because I TRULY believe in this industry and I truly believe I have done nothing worng. I chose to fight instead of roll-over no matter what some of you claim.

5) Larry Walters and gang from http://www.firstamendment.com/ is truly one of the BEST allies you can have in this industry. I owe my freadom to these guys. They are truly amazing. Larry, Derk, and Marc believe so much in this industry and take attacks against it so personally that they come out fighting like pitbulls. They are in my opinion THE BEST in the industry.

please excure spelling and grammer mistakes as I typed this very fast as I am late for something already.

Congratulations on getting this behind you.

If you want to be safe, you should probably delete your post and not post anything until after the sentencing.

so you are leaving the biz now right xanx?

I will be working in a mainstream capacity for the terms of the probation, yes.

Good luck with the mainstream biz:)

haha well i guess our product can be said to be mainstream ;) see sig.

glad its over... it actually shouldn't have went anywhere.... i hope those "opportunities" stem from the publicity he receieved

How could it have been any worse then the impact of pleading NO Contest? All that does is make it easier to get the next obscenity conviction, from what I read on pleading no contest which is like guilty lite.
Im glad your free and wish you the best and understand the costs and not being a big fish sucks.

You don't understand the law then, do you? A plea of no contest is nothing like a guilty plea or like "guilty lite."

A plea of NO CONTEST simply means that you do not wish to contest the charge against you, but wish to talk to the Judge about mitigating circumstances. Judgment will be entered by the Judge and some penalty will be set.

By a plea of GUILTY, you admit that you committed the act charged, that the act is prohibited by law, and that you have no defense for your act.

A plea of NOT GUILTY means that you are informing the Court that you deny guilt and that the prosecution must prove its charges against you.

If you plead NOT GUILTY, you will need to decide whether or not to employ an attorney to represent you at trial or at a plea docket. You may defend yourself, but no one else except an attorney may represent you.

he was not standing up for the adult industry. i get so tired of hearing this shit. if someone wants to speak for me, i would appreciate it very much if they were not on CNN talking about giving free porn to soldiers in exchange for pics of dead bodies killed in a war - and further more, doing it from Polk County Florida where everyone from the D.A. to the retarded bag boy at the supermarket knows that porn is not tolerated in any way shape or form.

FUCK ALL YOU GUYS WHO SAY HE WAS DOING THIS FOR ME. HE IS A STUPID JACKASS THAT GOT IN TROUBLE. IT WAS PREDICTABLE. HE WAS WRONG. AND DON"T FUCKING EVER SAY IT WAS DONE FOR ME. IF YOU ARE DEALING IN PORN IN POLK COUNTY ---- YOU ARE IN THE WRONG. They don't want it there. That has been made abundantly clear over the years.


:disgust

Incredible story.

Reminds me of the way the CBDLF ( Comic Book Legal Defense Fund ) has had to fight for rights.

I don't know both sides of this case so all I can say is time will tell if this was a good decision or bad.

The Universe works in weird ways, but one thing is certain, what goes around comes around. If the authorities were unjust in going after you, you can bet your bottom dollar they'll be answering charges as well one day. Considering Florida and it's history it wouldn't surprise me.

My main concern is the 'free speech' angle. Never saw your site but it sounds like you got a bit political.

Can't have that around here! Put out all the porn you want but don't fuck up politics. There's an election ahead.

How much longer Papa Smurf?

Bingo !


546321

n law, a plea of "nolo contendere" means that the defendant does not admit the charge, but does not dispute it either. This is also called a plea of no contest or, more informally, a "nolo" plea. "Nolo contendere" is Latin and literally means "I do not wish to contend." Spiro Agnew famously described it as "I didn't do it, but I'll never do it again." In putting in such a plea, defendants agree that the court may find them guilty criminally without ever admitting to the act(s) they are charged with.

Defendants could do this for a variety of reasons:

* The issue may, for example, be a complex criminal one and defendants may thus not be certain whether in doing what they did, they have in fact committed the crime they are charged with. The defendants thus fully leave it for the court to determine whether they have committed the crime in question and signal that they may accept the decision of the court for themselves. (This of course requires the defendants to have and maintain full faith in the court.)
* A no contest plea can be entered by criminal defendants facing a realistic prospect of conviction, who do not wish to undergo a trial, and yet are not willing to admit to the offense charged. However, in the United States, the Alford plea is an alternative plea that can be made in this situation.
* Specifically, defendants may wish to avoid admitting to a tort or any other type of wrongdoing alleged in the indictment or information against them with a view to possible later civil action.
* Another advantage can be in saving on legal costs. This typically is a consideration when those costs exceed any possible penalties that may be levied on a guilty party.

Recently a nolo plea seems to have moved increasingly into the direction of a guilty plea, almost barring its use for the first reason given above: Both in court room practice and especially in terms of outside media coverage, the possibility of pleading no contest for such (quite upstanding) reasons apparently is rarely ever considered in most cases and places.

Generally, defendants pleading nolo contendere will be found guilty of the offense by the court, as there rarely is (or can be, even) an effective defense without contesting the charge at hand. Furthermore, a nolo plea generally has the same effect as a plea or verdict of guilty for purposes of sentencing, and, depending upon the jurisdiction, may have the same effect as a conviction for the purposes of civil disabilities (such as loss of a driver's license or the right to own a firearm) or use as an aggravating factor if the defendants are later convicted of another offense.

Defendants will not, however, be made to allocute to the charges. Also, this plea (unlike a guilty plea) may not be used against them to establish negligence per se, malice, or even that they actually did the acts which resulted in the conviction, in later civil proceedings related to the same set of facts as the criminal prosecution. It is not an admission of guilt, and provides one major advantage to defendants: It may not be used later as the basis for civil proceedings seeking monetary or other damages against defendants, as can a guilty plea.

In some jurisdictions, such as the U.S. state of Texas, the right to appeal the results of a plea bargain taken from a plea of nolo contendere is highly restricted. In Texas, defendants who have entered a plea of nolo contendere may only appeal the judgment of the court if the appeal is based on written pretrial motions ruled upon by the court or with the trial judge's permission.

Some critics have spoken out against the nolo contendere and Alford pleas on the moral grounds that they undermine public confidence in the accuracy and fairness of the criminal justice system, sending some people to jail who are unrepentant or innocent; and that they dodge the "morality play" aspect of a criminal trial, in which upright civilization is vindicated and the community sees that the guilty are punished. Others see this as the major benefit of these pleas.

I remember raising this point about the authorities using RICO " at every sauce " and soon the PATRIOT AACT too ...

Right wingers ( Ronbtx, sperbonzo, TheKing, 12clicks, Warchild and so on ) ... laughed and posted pictures of Tin Foil hats .... :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Here is to them :

http://www.sightlossmatters.com/imag...ne-user-lo.jpg

You can always search the threads ... I don't have time for that anymore :2 cents:

For best results this deserves it's own thread. :thumbsup

OK here's what i think everyone knows.

The government feared for its case so they offered a plea deal with the nolo, on the flip side if he went through with the not guilty they were going to make sure he spent a pile of money to defend himself, money that they intended to try to confiscate under RICO predicates. RICO forfieture was set up to prevent wealthy mobsters from having the resources to defend themselves. Using it here is an abomination for sure.

The nolo IS a guilty plea no doubt about it, the sentencing is the same, it goes on your record and it counts against you if you are convicted again just you you didnt say you are guilty doesn't mean the court didn't lay that verdict on you, for all practical purposes they do. Should he try to get a security clearance...thats on his record same as a guilty...deal with it.

He didn't plea nolo for anyone but himself, he certainly didn't help us by doing so, his only real chance to help the biz was to go the distance

arguably he didn't hurt us but on the flip side arguably he did. You can bet the state chalked it up as a win and it makes it easier next time around.

dont get me wrong I don't blame him, defending himself would have been a huge expense and the state knew it. They counted on it when they offered the deal...it seems like everyone won but truth is we all lost

he lost because well...he is guilty and paying for his crime
we lost because a good fight on first amendment grounds would likely have won

who won? Larry Walters won...he will chalk this up in his win column...but how can he and the state win...only in a lawyers mind....but he did get paid so thats a win in his P&L.

The prosecutor won, he got a conviction period

So we can safely say the lawyers won

Sadly the constitution lost.

meaning we the people, lost.

Very nicely put, Mike.

The question now is : WHO'S NEXT ?

No, the people lost because of the tax dollars expended to prosecute and investigate. It must have been tens if not hundreds of thousands of bucks. They didn't recoup. It's gotta be answerable at some point.

What was on the site that was considered obscene? What did he do that required a RICO case?

There are millions of people running over the borders and thousands committing violent crimes but the taxpayer dollars were spent to beat down a one guy's website? There's something else going on here.

It was an 'easy pickens' attack and no one won. At least Chris is still free but 5 years probation? He must have had something on his site that justified this.

In the U.S. like in some countries, if you have a nude woman in a creative work people complain. Yet you can show all the images of mayhem til your heart's content. What does that say about the stable mental state of a person or people who would allow that?

What exactly did Chris do that brought this down on him? Showing pictures?

I am sorry, but in each of the points you make you contradict yourself


in my eyes you are a loser ! a pathetic loser

ahh ok, thats why you say things like this ?

first it cost very little to prosecute this case realistically the prosecutor is a salaried employee, in the terms of cost per win this one was realistically a few hundred bucks...nothing compared to what would have been spent had it gone the distance.

Second I have nothing against Mr Walters other than his being an attorney of course...and I have nothing against capitalism but a capitalist is what he is. While I don't expect him to work for free I would like to see a tad of pro bono work on his part when a win would be hugely beneficial to everyone in the industry he defends...of course if he did that then he wouldnt make money cuz he wouldnt have to defend us right?

Lets be careful when we practically canonize an attorney here...

ahh, so on the one hand you want to make it look like you are just a smalltimer , and on the other hand you want to brag about how much money you make ? all in one time ? ? ?huh ? ? idiot!!!!

He's been through hell ???? Bullshit. Censorship sucks, but assholes in Porn aren't happy peddling their porn crap, they have to pay homeless people to beat the shit out of each other or pay American soldiers to strip off their clothes and act unprofessional while in the service or convince soldiers to send bloody war pictures to a pornsite. Everyone involved should be prosecuted, including the stupid ass USA servicemen/women.

And Dave, start acting your age and cover up that old wrinkled prick of yours and keep it hidden.

You are one sorry bastard. Don't talk to me about censorship. I get censored on boards all the time, and I don't like people stepping on my First Amendment Rights, but the bastard in this case deserves what he got and should have gotten more.