My Photo

October 2010

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            
Blog powered by Typepad

Photo Albums

« IT'S UP TO YOU | Main | STORY OF BETRAYAL »

October 01, 2006

Comments

Steve

That pretty well sums it all up, doesn't it? Just before I accessed this site, I was checking my email. I found an internet "Amber" alert posted there. Three years old, brown hair and eyes, stolen away from her home by a "family friend" who looks like Charlie Sheen after five years in prison. Reachelle Smith of Minot ND, lovingly known as "Peanut", wearing a "Pooh Bear" T-shirt and looking up with large, happy eyes. I didn't have to read your story about Michelle to know what this child's fate likely is already.

That brings us right back to "Hounddog". Those film crewman- the ones who initially spoke up under conditions of anonymity- made possible for us to know about what happened on that movie set. Without them, we might never have learned about what was done to film a still-revolting sex-fest with children in it. Nor can I blame them much for lying low now. They probably have families, too. Why should they take further risks with their livelihood when no legal authority, state or federal, are willing to do likewise?

Yet, this is exactly what we must ask of them... even as we try to find someone who will step up and take on the Hollywood interests in court. We must remind them (and never forget ourselves) of the terrible consequences pending the release of this film. This conduct against children, if unchallenged and allowed to prosper, will only engender more of the same. Without a firm legal bulwark, the ramparts manned by prosecutors and police who care enough to put it all on the line, those children are unprotected. Yours, mine... and theirs.

They need to be made to understand that. They need to look into the dear, sweet eyes of little "Peanut" and see those of their own children mirrored there. Even if she's found alive, it's unlikely that those same eyes will ever know the glow of innocence again. Three other children, one of whom I had referred to as "America's Daughter" prior to July 20th, will have lost theirs only to a slightly lesser degree.

How many more, now, after them? How many more children will be recruited by depraved filmmakers and from greedy, amoral parents? How many others will be abused and sexualized by society's vermin, now empowered by child sex gone mainstream? How many more "Peanuts" will result from it?

Tre, Marc and Steve: Those D.A.s in Brunswick and New Hannover Counties must never know a quiet moment, nor should those FBI people in Wilmington, nor should that out-to-lunch State Attorney General until some attempt is made to render justice. A credible attempt. Then and only then will we truely have a right to tell those witnesses to step forward. Perhaps, though, as those crewmen look at their own children and remember how other children were so heartlessly used in their presence, they may do so anyway.

Let's hope so... and do all we can from our end, for all our children together.

Concerned citizen

FYI:

"Hound Dog" has just undergone a thorough review by the local District Attorney's office and found to be completely within the law regarding its content and methodology.

I believe Blue Line should be soon receiving a copy of the results of that investigation.

I would hope that, in the interest of fairness and full disclosure, Blue Line will be equally earnest in its coverage of this news as it has been in its allegations and assumptions regarding the movie's alleged improprieties.

I believe it's also time to realize that attempting to indict the entire Wilmington film community, State legislators who supported the recent film incentive package, and local law enforcement authorities whom you believe failed to sufficiently investigate this production, is just so much obtuse, vapid and ill-informed grandstanding and that the powers that be at Blue Line will make sure they are in full possession of the facts before launching a similar crusade in the future.

Steve

Yes, "Concerned Citizen", I WILL be looking forward to a report, at long last, from the Wilmington D.A. He's certainly had enough time to make a preliminary investigation (four months!) and on a major event that was occuring right in his back yard for two months. Let's just hope he's decided to present some hard facts and not some trite means of fluffing it off after waiting for the heat to die down and the elections to be over.

Hard choices by legal authorities, especially when it goes against large, vested interests who tend to help finance one's election campaigns, are difficult to come by. We'll see what this one has to offer and judge accordingly. The very fact, however, that this D.A. is already being lauded by the Wilmington "film community", people whose support for locally-filmed child-sex movies is notorious and long-standing, gives me grave doubts already that anything concrete will be forthcoming.

Tre Benson

Concerned Citizen

I believe that the District Attorney, Ben David, has no intention of releasing any finding pertaining to his office's investigation into Hound Dog. Nor would he release any such finding regarding any case to me or anyone outside legitimate parties. (such as attorneys and law enforcement that are associated with the case)

The Blue Line Radio happens to have a professional and friendly relationship with the DA and would never suggest or ask anything of him that was not within our rights. We have never asked for, thus we will never receive, such a report.

The DA of the 13th District, Rex Gore, may very well be the DA that has jurisdiction since the questionable acts took place there in Brunswick County. DA Gore has just won his reelection by defeating Ben David's brother.

Politics.

Your comments:

"I believe it's also time to realize that attempting to indict the entire Wilmington film community, State legislators who supported the recent film incentive package, and local law enforcement authorities whom you believe failed to sufficiently investigate this production, is just so much obtuse, vapid and ill-informed grandstanding and that the powers that be at Blue Line will make sure they are in full possession of the facts before launching a similar crusade in the future."

WARNING: If you wish to pay for this blogsite you can say whatever you like. But because you don't pay for it I will have to restrict your future posts to things you know and can prove. Should you choose to continue with this sort of bullshit I will delete all of your prior posts and prohibit your access to this site. I take particular offense to your comments regarding my "indictment" of the entire film community when I consider myself a part of that family. It was the film community that came to me and shared with me their outrage. These people, the majority of them, are my brothers, people I have worked with for nearly 20 years. My differences regarding the film incentive scam is purely political ideology. I see it as corporate welfare and I am against it be it for Corning, GE or film makers (myself). Call it libertarian or ultra conservative hallmarks, call it anti-labor, whatever you want, but it is also capitalism 101, keeping government out of business.

And lastly I took offense to the term "ill informed." We are anything but ill informed. We have way too many connections to not be able to make a phone call or two to find out just about anything we want to know. You would have to know our personal, professional and family background to make a proper judgment regarding what we know and don't know. We are very well informed on this issue as we are with all the other cases we investigate. I admit information sometimes changes and when it does we adapt. It is an ongoing process and nothing is over until it is over. And this crap is anything but over so settle down.

Steve

Dear Tre: Please forgive my own remarks about the "film community". I realize that there must be many good people, like yourself, involved in the arts there... and thank God for it or, like you say, this "Hounddog" thing might never have come to light. Maybe I'm just getting a little cynical over the "arts"! I just hope that they, like you, won't put it aside out of despair. Best wishes.

Concerned citizen

I meant "ill informed" when it came to Hound Dog, as your allegations were obviously based on ignorance of the facts and hearsay. Even you admitted as much in past retractions.

And the report won't come to you from the DA's office, but rather from folks involved with Hound Dog, who also received copies, and would like to see you go forth with an honest awareness of the reality of the situation as regards this film and Dakota Fanning, in the interest of transparency, truth and service to the film community and the various government figures you have accused and impugned through the process of your "investigation".

Concerned citizen

Here's the letter from the DA's office, as promised.

https://i13.tinypic.com/4dpec6r.jpg

Steve

Dear Concerned Citizen:

As I see it, the key phrase here is "uncut version". How, after all this time, could the District Attorney's Office people know if they were, in fact, seeing all that had been filmed? Additionally, we must not lose sight of the key point of contention: What was done to those children in the process of filming? The camera- even the video assist- couldn't have caught it all. There was no state official on set to witness or protect.

Sorry, but I still think this smells of a whitewash by Mr. David. Nor does it address the prime extra-legal concern... that of the basic immorality of using and exposing children to such grossly degrading and exploitative scenarios as the screenplay describes. Mr. David (and his party's moneylenders in Hollywood) may have no problem with this, but many others have.

In short; disappointing, but predictable.

Concerned citizen

Since you weren't there to witness the proceedings, aren't you being extremely presumptuous in your judgment?

Scenes involving a close-up of a girl's face in pain or tears and a hand clenching need not involve any sexually descriptive context in regards to actual filming, nor does a person have to expose themselves to the emotional degradation of a rape in order to act in a scene that to a viewer portrays a rape.

An representative of child labor in the form of a state accredited tutor was there to witness the proceedings, so your comment to the contrary is incorrect.

It's evident to me that you're not sufficiently conversant in the methods of film-making to be making the kind of off-the-cuff assumptions you're making.

Note that Mr. David's letter says he also "interviewed various members of the production team" which means he did more than just view an unedited version of the film.

Still, some folks won't be convinced that Fanning didn't suffer any emotional or degrading exposure no matter what evidence is presented to them, and you seem to be of that ilk.

Good day.

Steve

Dear Concerned Citizen:

You seem congenitally unable to grasp certain facts. First of all (and again!) the edited film is not the reality. What happened on-set in it's filming is. For that, we have the original screenplay and the statements of those production crewmen who defected.

There is no way to adequately shield children from such blatant sexual content of this sort in the process of filming. In-depth "knowledge" of filmation is not necessary to grasp that fact. Common knowledge, common sense and common decency are. These are qualities sadly lacking in those elitists who call themselves "the film community".

Naturally, "various members of the production team" are not going to talk about the nude dancing, interchild sex and graphic rape scenes. They're only depraved, not crazy! There's also something called the 5th Amendment. Nor is a district attorney who likes being one going to press an inherently explosive case on a major contributor to the local economy... and to his re-election.

Some of us care more about kids than we do filmmaker's profits. You, Mr. David, Frank Capra, Jr. and others heretofor mentioned obviously don't share that concept. We realize that the release of "Hounddog" (or whatever they will ultimately call it) represents a new threat to children, morally and physically.

Hollywood is psychologically incapable of assuming responsibility for the degradations and crimes they sponsor and sustain as they push back the boundaries ever farther. Yet, those very crimes are inherent in their works... including the crime rate against children and by children. This is a legacy of degeneration that is shared by those who support their endeavors.

P.S. Jan Cerwonka is Dakota's private tutor, certified by SAG and the State of California. She has no ties to or authority from the State of North Carolina and never did.

The comments to this entry are closed.