CRIME REPORT

MEDIA- BIAS

Ex-ACLU leader’s child-porn arrest fails to make news
03/04/2007

In the summer of 2003, Operation Predator was launched by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency. The investigation has targeted individuals who make and consume child pornography worldwide.
Because much of this stuff is manufactured overseas and shipped to America, ICE agents took the lead in tracking down the bad guys in the U.S.
In case you don’t know, child pornography features children from infants on up being raped in a variety of ways by adults. It is expensive to purchase and, because of the Internet, the distribution of this evil material has become easy. Have a credit card, you can get it.
According to ICE agents, one of those who used a credit card to purchase child porn is attorney Charles Rust-Tierney, the former president of the American Civil Liberties Union in Virginia. Tierney was arrested and charged on Feb. 23.
Tierney apparently told the feds that he paid for the child porn using a PayPal account and then downloaded images of prepubescent girls being violently raped onto CD-ROM disks, which the authorities seized in his home.
One of the images Tierney was in possession of showed a little girl tied up and screaming while being violently raped.
This shocking case received little media attention even though Tierney, 51, is a well-known figure in the Washington, D.C., area and strenuously fought against limits on Internet access in libraries.
On Dec. 1, 1998, Tierney issued this statement: “Recognizing that individuals will continue to behave responsibly and appropriately while in the library, the default should be maximum, unrestricted access to the valuable resources of the Internet.”
And included among those “resources” is child porn. The ACLU in Virginia successfully blocked any filtering of objectionable material in Loudon County libraries.
This is off-the-chart disturbing, and you would think the media would be all over it. When Ted Haggard was scandalized by a male prostitute in Colorado, the media relentlessly hammered the preacher. He deserved much of it, but the coverage was everywhere.

How many of you have heard of Charles Rust-Tierney?
The only major liberal news organization to cover the story was The Washington Post. It ran a small mention of it in the second section of the paper, essentially burying the situation. The New York Times ignored the story entirely. So did NBC News, CBS News and CNN. ABC News mentioned it on its Web site.
There is no question that an ACLU big shot who fought against library filters being busted on federal child porn charges is a big story. So what’s going on?
The truth is the committed left press in America is no longer interested in reporting the news. Anything that hinders a favorable view of the far left will be ignored; anything that advances liberal causes will be celebrated. News reporting today is largely about ideology and shaping the culture, not about informing the public.
This is dangerous. The Constitution gives the news media a wide variety of protections because the Founding Fathers wanted information to get to the folks. So answer me this: Did the media do its job covering the case of Charles Rust-Tierney?
It did not. Another example of the downward spiral of American journalism. The New York Times masthead says “All the News That’s Fit to Print.”
Sure.

By Bill O'Reilly - Veteran TV news anchor and author Bill O’Reilly is a host on Fox News.

Excellent blogsite that has been following this story closely.

We saw this sort of bias in the 2002 campaign when the Star News didn't have the balls to go searching for the truth regarding the Sid Causey/ Tampa drug story.

A political blogsite that shed light on this was quickly dismissed, no one understands the power of the media's bias any better than the media. There is little excuse for a REAL newspaper to turn a blind eye to the truth.

Lately it seems since one of their independent contractors was killed while in the custody and safe keeping of the sheriff, the paper has grown tired of such scandal.

Causey, concerned over his recent attention due to the death of Peyton Strickland, reached out the Board of Commissioners last month to ask for their support, whining about the Star News' editorial attacks upon his character and his ability to administer his duties as sheriff. Of course his butt was promptly smooched upon by Bill Caster and Bobby Greer who for some reason think a history of multimillion dollar lawsuits is evidence of a good job.

I'm tempted to make public the audio tapes made during the investigation into the truthfulness of the Tampa allegations. The tapes, coupled with the police reports, proved how Causey conspired to rob drug money from a major drug trafficker in Tampa.

But then again, why? No one cares about who the Chief law enforcement officer of this county is, if they did the man would be held accountable and dismissed from office years ago when he attempted to cover up the Gary Rummer death.

Still a Bunch of Questions

Paul Petersen of the child advocacy group A Minor Consideration and I have been in constant contact since his appearance on our radio program. I have great respect for him and his work.

Paul sent me an email this morning worth posting here because he is searching for answers, answers to questions I feel important for all of you to grasp and take with you when evalutating whether or not this subject is closed or not.

Personally I have grown weary of it, I admit it. I have read all the blogsites and reviews of the movie I care to. I hopefully spoken with the last reporter about this and soon can put this to bed because no one seems to care.

Then there is Paul. Steadfast, determined to see this fight to its last blow. He has trianed a lifetime for this fight, it is perfect for him.
Visit his website,
www.minorcon.org and see just how right he is about Dakota. He is championing her and all the others who will ultimately follow in her footsteps.

But take a look at these questions, see how deep this needs to go before it can be let go.

1. When was the physical script put into the hands of Dakota Fanning, and by whom? Reports suggest that the Fanning representatives had the script for months before initial financing was acquired, which makes Dakota an eleven-year-old child when she was exposed to the words on the page (in interviews this young actress admits she read the script and “identified with the character.”). When did that take place?

2. Given what the script contains, who made the decision to permit a minor to act out its contents? Did they have an economic interest and/or the professional background to make an “informed decision” as to the potential ramifications? Did they counsel with an outside professional, and if not, why not?

3. If entire scenes were NOT in the DVD provided to the DA the question becomes, were those scenes filmed?

4. Did the DA ask for and receive the Film Editor’s notes from Ms. Sabine Hoffman? That would provide tracking for the actual work Dakota did on this film. The close-ups, two-shots, over-the-shoulder shots, etc. will be clearly “marked” in the Editor’s notes.

5. Did the DA ask for and receive the real-time notes and comments of what is sometimes called the Continuity Director, but in this instance is billed as the Script Supervisor, Ms. Kara B. Still? The Script Supervisor’s notes would tell the DA how much “coverage” there was of each individual scene whether it was in the DVD or not. This would provide a fair approximation as to how many times Dakota was present, either off-camera or on-camera, during the making of the individual scenes. Both the dates, the total coverage, and the number of “takes” would be in the Script Supervisor’s notes.

6. Did the DA put hands on the crew’s time cards to see the number of hours worked per day? Since Dakota was in nearly every scene of this movie a simple request of the Call Times/Dismissal Times of the Make-Up and Hairdressing people would provide an indication of the number of hours worked by Dakota.

7. Much has been made of the presence of a Welfare Worker on the set, Jan Cerwonka, a California-certified Studio Teacher. Was this person paid by Dakota Inc, or the production company? What was her authority under North Carolina law? In California a set teacher is charged, in Law, with “protecting the health, safety and morals of the Minor.”

8. The popular press says that Dakota Fanning’s “quote” for a major film is $3 million dollars. Was Dakota’s participation in this film paid or deferred, and if it was deferred payment, to whom would the money flow? This is important to show whether Dakota, an unemancipated minor, was or was not served by “uncompromised representation.” If her alleged “protectors” had an economic interest (parents, teacher, agent, lawyers, etc.) did that color their judgment?

9. When a company becomes a Signatory Company with Screen Actors Guild that means that they will abide by the terms of the SAG Basic Agreement with Producers, and within that Basic Agreement, in a section devoted specifically to Minors, there is language in “the Basic Agreement” that says the following: “In the absence of law…or in instances where there is a conflict in Law…the strictest interpretation [of child labor laws and protections] shall apply.” The brackets are mine. Did the production company or studio teacher follow “the strictest interpretation?” Did Dakota work more than 8 ½ hours per day? Was she a victim of uncompensated overtime?

10. If entire scenes and the full scope of the “coverage” (clips required to make scenes come together in the editing room) were not in the DVD presented to the District Attorney, where is the physical location of that footage…and is it under lock and key?

11. Lastly, who, and under what “legal authority” is permitted by Law to permit a minor, or employ a minor, to simulate a sexual act or to perform in a production who intent is to leave the impression that a minor participated in an unlawful sexual act for commercial purposes?

Thanks Paul!

SCENE 39 IS MISSING

HOUNDDOG

The controversial movie Hounddog staring Dakota Fanning opened Monday night to a packed house of film buffs and entertainment professionals. Photophile celebs ushered in by highly paid publicists to authenticate an appearance of legitimacy to this perverse tale of what is wrong with independent filmmaking. Particularly in North Carolina.

This horndog of a movie featuring more shots of children in their underpants than in all of Michael Jackson's home videos combined. A labored and well used "southern gothic tale" featuring everything from the drunken abusive white trash of a father to the wise ol' darky full of snake handling symbolism and a shadowy past. Critics by and large have panned this movie as well as the over the top performances of Dakota and the rest of the troops.

"Fanning gives a brave performance under the circumstances, but she can't escape this hilariously bad late-'50s Southern Gothic, which vomits up huge chunks of undigested Tennessee Williams preserved in swamp gas. Every hackneyed symbol of Suthin' living is dredged up one more time: We've got magnolias and kudzu, we've got cicadas squeaking so loudly you can barely hear the dialogue. (Turn 'em up!) We've got oh-so-wise black folks singin' the blues and dispensin' folk wisdom. We've got Piper Laurie, dressed like a walking sofa, as the horror-show grandma with electrified hair, Bible in one hand and whiskey bottle in the other. We've got Robin Wright Penn (an actress I admire) drifting through the movie in her sexy-battered-vulnerable mode, wearing just a slip, a grimace and a shiner. " excerpt from the Salon review

Frustrating is the thought that when I was first informed about the activities on and around the set, and found me a copy of the shooting script, I immediately contacted the authorities hoping their investigation would expose some of the abuses that I am certain to have taken place.

Again I must leave the interpretation of the law up to the authorities but when I am told that there is an investigation and there are no real objective measures taken to look into allegations of something as serious as the sexual exploitation of a minor child I have to question the goal of the investigation.

When ADA Connie Jordan looked at the edited version of Hounddog and told me she saw nothing illegal. Well, of course not. The production had nearly 5 months to provide that cut of the movie. ADA Jordan had no idea there would be something other than what was provided to her for reference as to what took place on set. She had also told me she never read the script, insisting that in her interviews with Dakota, her mom and the producers and director gave her the necessary information.

I asked ADA Jordan if she had seen what is labeled as scene 39 in the script which states as follows:

39 INT. SHED - DAY
Lewellen and Buddy are in hysterics of giggles as they take off their wet swimsuits and hang them on a ladder to dry. They lay down on the floor next to each other. Still giggling they begin touching each others bodies in an exploration of their sexes. Like a game they've played many times before.

Jordan said she couldn't remember seeing it in the version she was given.

After the premiere several national newspapers published their reviews and I contacted one from the New York Post's Lou Lemenick who told me that scene 39 was not in the version he saw at Sundance.

This is extremely suspect for a conspiracist like myself. Some might suggest that the scene was never filmed but in an email from Hounddog producer Jen Gatien I was told, that "We had to reshoot scene 39 as we had a stunt that day with a crane and needed to move to that scene, so we rescheduled on the last day of shooting."

So the scene was shot, not once but twice and not included in the final cut. Now normally this wouldn't be that concerning because a movie is extremely liquid, pieces have to be carefully manipulated into place which sometimes means scenes get dropped. However this is the scene I was told upset investors and it had to be reshot at the last minute to clean it up.

Now an excluded scene may not prove to provide any evidence that may move an aggressive prosecutor to file formal charges but it will help to prove a thorough investigation into serious charges.

I didn't ask for a movie review when I made my report of allegations of the sexual exploitation of minors, what I expected was an investigation, a real criminal investigation, that's it.

NICE TRY

The Blue Line Radio was given a copy of the November 29th letter by District Attorney Ben David regarding last week's viewing of an unfinished version of the Dakota Fanning movie Hound Dog. In that letter, District Attorney David stated that he determined that there was no crime committed within his jurisdiction and that his office will not be prosecuting anyone associate with the production or distribution of the movie.

There are miles of film footage shot on a typical feature length motion picture. Sometimes as much as 90% of what was shot lay on the edit room floor when the film has finally been pieced together. The end product is not always an accurate, historic, documentation of what action took place on the set during the process of making a film.

While we at the Blue Line continue to believe those that we have spoken with regarding the initial allegations of the criminal sexual exploitation of a minor, we are also extremely confident in the capabilities of District Attorney David's office's ability to run a thorough investigation and unquestionably accept his professional judgment into this matter.

The principle allegations of sexual exploitation involved scenes shot outside the 5th Judicial District. Those scenes, which were shot at Brunswick County's Orton Plantation, were being addressed by the 13th Judicial District, specifically District Attorney Rex Gore's office and his office has not contacted us regarding his findings.

Those of us at the Blue Line initially pressed for an investigation based on information we received back in June. Five months later we have one investigation completed in time for the movie's premiere at Sundance.

Blue Line Radio never  said that the edited form of the movie would contain anything illegal. We were, and still are, concerned with the action that took place on set during the staging of several sexually explicit scenes that were  filmed outside District Attorney David's jurisdiction. We will still strongly advocate for the rights of children to live, work, and enjoy life unmolested by exploitation.

CAN I GET A WITNESS?

For several weeks running you have heard talk of the Dakota Fanning movie shot in Wilmington, NC that includes explicit sex acts by the 12 year old actress and two other children, 10 and 8. According to the script scenes of suggested nudity and fondling as well as a graphic scene of the rape of Dakota’s character, who at 9 years old, dances naked for a man in order to get tickets to see Elvis Pressley, after the dance the man rapes her in front of her 10 year old boyfriend. We were told law enforcement was investigating this as the sexual exploitation of minors.

Whether or not authorities will pursue a crime where a child willingly allows this to take place we don’t know. Whether or not authorities will pursue a crime where the children involved were not nude and were not engaged in actual acts of sex, again we don’t know. We do know that it is a state and federal crime for a minor to portray an explicit sex act real or pretend, clothed or unclothed.

Earlier this year, prosecutors obtained a guilty plea on child pornography charges from Sheila L. Sellinger, then of Shoals, Ind., who had been selling illegal photographs of her 10-year-old daughter on a modeling Web site. Last month, Ms. Sellinger was sentenced to almost 12 years in prison.

Ms. Sellinger, who earned thousands of dollars a week from the marketing of the clothed images of her daughter, cooperated with law enforcement, leading to the arrest of two men who had been assisting her with her site and had been running several more, court records show.

Another woman accused of running a Web site that published graphic fictional stories about the torture and sexual abuse of children was indicted this week by a federal grand jury on obscenity charges.

Karen Fletcher, 54, of Donora, was indicted last Tuesday, and the charges were announced on Wednesday by U.S. Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan.

"Use of the Internet to distribute obscene stories like these not only violates federal law, but also emboldens sex offenders who would target children," Buchanan said.

Fletcher's site contained excerpts of stories about child sex, torture and murder that were available to all visitors, prosecutors said. Users could pay a fee to read whole stories, such as one that described the rape and sexual molestation of children, prosecutors said.

Fletcher was charged with one count for each of six stories that involved the kidnapping, torture, sexual molestation and murder of children 9 years and younger.

Fletcher, reached at home Wednesday, said federal authorities "didn't like my site." She said she was not aware of the indictment and otherwise declined to comment.

"I am not going to say a word. You have a wonderful day," Fletcher said.

Fletcher described her site as a "fantasy site" and told authorities that she posts explicit stories about adults having sex with children, the FBI said in a search warrant affidavit unsealed Wednesday. The charges carry a statutory maximum of 30 years in prison and a $1.5 million fine.

Fletcher's site offers written works instead of videos, written words about the rape and torture of children. Ms. Sellinger offered clothed images of her 10 year-old daughter to sexual perverts and received 12 years in federal prison. The director and producers of the Dakota Fanning movie shot in Wilmington and Brunswick County that was based on the written words in the script, placed a 9 year old child in graphically illustrative sexual roles including the humiliation and rape of this child. Of course no children were forced to do this, no children were actually filmed engaged in actual sex acts, but neither were the children in Ms. Fletcher’s tales of “fantasy” and Ms. Sellinger’s 10 year-old daughter. The only difference is that because an incentive bill passed by the State legislature, we the taxpaying citizens, the heads of families, the educators, lawmen and women, clergy and child advocates are kicking back money to this Dakota Fanning film and this may be overlooked for political reasons. We are, in a way, co-producers this movie.

Does this mean we are accomplices? Will Senator Julia Boseman be indicted along with Danny McComas and Thoas Wright for being child pornographers because they co-sponsored the Bill?

In the news the other day was an announcement that a prominent congressman was retiring because of allegations that go back 2 years. If the media had not gotten a hold of this story who would have heard about it?

Republican Representative Mark Foley, whose district covers part of Southwest Florida, has resigned from the US House in the wake of scandal over America Online Instant messages to at least one 16 year old that had served as a Page to the Congressman. In the computer messages to the boy the Congressman made sexual conversation with him regarding his anatomy and his masturbatory habits. The written conversation was anything but innocent, it was a grown man attempting to lure a 16 year old boy into a sexual, although cyber sexual experience. A congressman that served on a committee to protect our children from the very same thing he is accused of. Is this a crime? We shall see.

Is it really a crime to pretend to do something? To fantasize about it in writing? Is it a crime to put underage kids in sexual situations in conversation, print or on film?

Are we overlooking something? Our kids? Do we put politics before justice?

Who knows but, a Columbus County man who struck and killed a 15-year-old riding a bicycle in April of last year in Bladen County entered a guilty plea Tuesday to involuntary manslaughter.

Sebastian Hill, 41, a convicted drug dealer, entered the plea before jury selection in his Bladen County Superior Court trial was to begin, Assistant District Attorney Elaine Kelley said. Hill was sentenced by Judge Craig B. Ellis to 18 to 22 months in prison.

Apparently the prosecutor didn’t have enough evidence about the hit and run, the drunk driving and the fact that an innocent 15 year old boy died as a result. Does anyone know if the boy lay there in need of assistance prior to his demise? Do we know how badly he suffered? It was reported that he died hours after arriving at the hospital. Who knows what would have happened had someone been thinking about saving the child rather than saving oneself.

18 – 22 months for a life. Out by Christmas in time to be with his family I guess. Who knows if it was justice that gave Hill the deal of a lifetime or if it was a overloaded court docket that rocked the scales of justice in his favor. Again a child is exploited because of convenience, because of perhaps politics.

Maybe it is just me, maybe I am asking too much, maybe I was born to the wrong family, a family that taught me that justice prevails. Makes me want to just throw my hands up. Just give up.

Then I remember that I have a son, a child that will someday ask me what matters, what is right, what is wrong. My son will grow-up looking to his father for guidance. Me. He will want to know what I think, how I feel about injustice. And what will I tell him if I throw up my hands, because you know what scares me more than anything? If I don’t tell him who will?

Last Sunday morning my 6 month-old nephew Reece was Christened in a wonderful ceremony. He was introduced to the church and accepted by the congregation that stood to affirm that they would protect and guide him in his Christian walk. Maybe it is just me but I believe each of them meant it when they stood for him. A sanctuary full of people, standing before God Almighty, taking an oath to save my Nephew from taking the wrong path. That is what Church is all about.

But I want to know who will stand with my son? Who will be there when a choice is made in error. Who will guide him, show him right from wrong? Who will see to it that the person or persons that harm him will be punished to the full extent of the law? I can’t always be there with him, beside him, I can’t protect him from slippery Congressmen, lecherous teachers, preditory public officials, profiteers and exploiters of my child’s innocence. Who will stand up and say they will be there for my son, for yours?

I’m not throwing my hands up, I believe some of you know how important all this is. And you are the ones that will stand before God and take that oath and protect all of our children. Can I get a witness?

IT'S UP TO YOU

Sometimes it seems the whole world is watching when it is only your neighbors. Certainly the world isn’t watching me, what I say, when I talk about the movie Hound Dog staring the child actress Dakota Fanning. But judging from emails and posts on the internet you would think that the whole world is indeed watching.

Maybe it is but when I check the traffic on our website there is no huge spike in visitors. No more than any other month we have had controversial topics. 250,000 hits a month is about average, we had maybe a 15% jump in the number of hits. Nothing to brag about, nothing to be able to claim that talk of Dakota Fanning created any major stir.

Except that this did cause my email box to be stuffed with atta-boys as well as some vicious complaints.

For those of you new to this I will fill you in. A movie was just filmed in this area staring Dakota Fanning, a 12 year old actress who has been as busy as any actress in Hollywood . Hide and Seek, Man on Fire, I am Sam and War of the Worlds, just to name a few of her accomplishments. Anyway this 12 year-old star portrays a 9 year old girl who finds herself in various sexually explicit scenes, including a rape that was rumored to show her either nude or partially dressed.

We hit on this back in June when I received a copy of the script. Outraged? Yes! Completely. Shocked is more like it. Shocked that there are laws against such things and no one seems to give a damn.

Originally I was hearing all kind of stories from crew members about this and that. But I wasn’t hearing from the authorities.

In July we contacted authorities about what we believed to be a cut and dry case of the sexual exploitation of a minor. Why did we do that? Because it is a state law that mandates any person that has reason to believe a crime against a child has taken place, that person is required by law to report such beliefs. Initially we were told that authorities were investigating the accusations. We have not made any attempt to follow up because that is not our job. Our job as a citizen is to make the report. That is what is required of us by law.

As a father, a worker in the film industry, as a man, and as a loud mouth radio show producer, I, we, Marc and myself , spoke up, stood up. There are many reasons to do so. Some reasons are simple; what were the guardians of these children staring in this movie thinking when they read this script and allowed their child to play these roles?

But there are many more complex reasons to talk about this, to stand up, and those reasons are more difficult to communicate. We had child-star advocate Paul Petersen of A Minor Consideration on our show to help us understand this new “cult of personality” created by children playing roles more and more frequently cast in adult situations with sexual overtones. He addressed how Hollywood chews up children and spits them out and how North Carolina has suspended the Child Labor laws for the movie industry in order to allow children to work as adults. Hopefully he was able to clear up some issues surrounding this aspect.

Another complex issue this movie brings up is reform. Back in the heyday of Wilmington’s film making history a movie called the Crow was shot at what was then called Carolco Studios, it is now Screen Gems. The Crow had many safety issues the most famous issue was the accidental shooting death of the star Brandon Lee, famous Kung Fu master, Bruce Lee’s son. I met Brandon when he was here, he used to work out at a gym a friend of mine got me to go to once and a while. He was a nice guy, friendly and approachable. But corners were cut and care was not taken on set and Brandon died as a result. No one on the crew from North Carolina was at fault. The blame was at the feet of the producers of this film. Since then the local union, and a Carolco and later Screen Gems employee named Gerald Waller worked to make sure this area would be known for making safety on set a priority.

See even though we, the film makers of North Carolina were not to blame for Brandon Lee’s death, we stood up and rallied to educate a concerned film community. So just as then we need to look at child labor and the use of children in film. This is our opportunity to stand up, to speak up. Why should North Carolina be the place Lolita, Bastard out of Carolina and now Hound Dog come when searching for a location to shoot a movie with scenes of disturbing violence against children? It is a question worth discussing.

But our primary reason for jumping on this story with such passion is because we do a show that spends a lot of time talking about crime in order to bridge a gap between law enforcement and the public. Building trust. We don’t much care about who shot John when and where, we want to know why this crime took place and what is being done to stop it from happening again.

So where does the Blue Line Radio Show fit in regarding Hound Dog? Over the past few years it seems some of our constitutionally protected rights have been eroded away. A combination of controversial art and internet images of children engaged in actual act of sex with adults alarmed Congress to such an extent some laws were created that limit what you can and can not do with children. For instance the child pornography law says the child does not have to be nude, the child does not actually have to be committing a real sex act, the child can just be portrayed as just being involved in a sex act. In fact the exact definition explicit act of sex by the federal government is “actual or simulated” in depictions of the minor child being involved in act of intercourse, masturbation, etc. Actual or simulated.

A woman just pleaded guilty to the federal charges of child pornography because she owned a pay website featuring images of her 10 year old daughter dressed.. not nude but clothed. But because this website catered to a select group of individuals that most likely had issues with fantasy this woman was sentenced to 12 years in prison. Twelve years for non-nude images of a 10 year old girl.

Now the exact same law can be used against the makers of Hound Dog. Certainly if this woman can go prison for 12 years for recording her daughter on film in non-sexually explicit acts then what about a movie that portrays a 9 year old girl doing a strip show for tickets to see Elvis, what about a movie that shows this girl force 2 other children at gunpoint to strip naked and touch each other?

WHAT ABOUT PICTURES I TAKE OF MY SON IN THE BATH TUB? Or my daughter in her dance costume and post it on my myspace.com website?

If you convict one, the Law tells me you must convict all. If a segment of the population is targeted for selling crack on the street corners why not enforce the same laws in the law offices, real estate offices, swanky restaurants and bars at Wrightsville Beach?

You think we are getting heat from this Dakota thing, wait until we blow the lid off who is doing drugs in Wilmington and who is turning the other way. We will be dead before we get out of the parking lot. And why is that? All too often money and politics interfere with the administration of Justice handcuffing law enforcement .

The idea that the movie industry has special favors is troubling.

Since day one all we have asked for is an investigation. Go to our archives and review our shows, watch the news interviews on WECT and WWAY, we have said from the beginning that we want an investigation. That’s it.

Make a decision is it a crime or not? Be public about it because I sure don’t want to go to prison for something someone else skated past with community blessings.

I mean I’m not saying I will do a movie featuring similar scenes as described in the Hound Dog script but if I did, I bet I would be shipped to sing-sing faster than you could say, Kiddie Porn.

The sad thing is if I wasn’t sent to prison I would most likely become a very rich man. Sad indeed. But also true.

As a psychology major, and a child advocate, with a history of counseling children struggling to survive sexual abuse, I find the script to have absolutely no scholarly solutions, as it claims, to address such issues portrayed by this film’s director/writer in her script. Whether or not I find this movie artistic or even tolerable is based on opinion. My expert opinion is reserved for the film’s ability to follow thru with their claim of it being an oasis to those who have suffered childhood abuse. That part I can back up because this movie will fail to bring hope to the victims of child abuse.

The rest is really up to you. The laws governing obscenity gauge what is right or wrong based on community standards. A motion picture image of a 9 year-old child watching her father masturbate is something that you need to determine whether or not it is something you can live with and perhaps defend. Because once this image is signed off on, by this community and others, you can bet your last dollar that more will follow.

So what do you think? Does this film offer artistic merit? Is it educationally beneficial to survivors of childhood sexual abuse? Is it something that is just wrong and should not be allowed into your community because it is obscene? Let us know, let us all know would you.

"LEGAL" CHILD PORN

The Sunday New York Times printed an article about "legal" child pornography. That's right I said LEGAL!

We have brought this up before ourselves regarding the Webe company out of Florida that publishes online a series of teen and preteen models in various states of undress. Non-nude images of children in sexual poses is the new way to skirt authorities when pedophiles search out images to fantasize about.

Contrary to initial published stories it has been reported recently that the Dakota Fanning movie Hound Dog did not film Dakota nude, instead we are told that she wore a body stocking, reported by a spokesperson of the movie's production company. We have heard various eyewitness reports as to how she was dressed, if you can call it that, in pasties and panties and one report said she was in a strapless bikini top and panties. The news media got upset with us because we claimed Dakota was undressed. To us and several people we talked with, a flesh colored body stocking, or pasties and panties is not being dressed. It may be something Hollywierded out folk wear around the mall or school in California or even New York City but not what most of us consider being "dressed" here in Mayberry, USA.

Surely they will think of a way to shoot the scene when her father is crawling into bed with her nude in a way that we will not believe it was sexual, we won't think of sex when we see Dakota's character curiously watching her father masturbate, nor will we think of a sex act when we see the 9 year old and the 10 year old boy laying naked on the floor while they kiss and fondle each other.

How do you boil a frog?

To boil a frog you must place the frog into a pot filled with temperate water and gradually bring the water to a boil. Apparently you can't place a frog into a hot pot, he knows better.

Same thing with us. Little by little the temperature increases and before we know it we are cooked. Dakota Fanning's movie may not be something that disturbs everyone but then again why would it? Could it be because our 4 and 5 year old daughters that we enrolled in dance class are taught to shimmy and shake as if they were dancing for tips at Tailfeathers and we keep sending them back for more? Do we not know the difference between a Mouseketeer and a half to three quarters naked, nearly legal, Britney Spears?

How far have we come? How much farther will we go?

Some have argued that Hound Dog is the artistic expression of a sex abuse victim that has created a movie that will heal other victims thru the message in the film. The films apparent message according to the script is wait till your father dies from a snake bite rather than report the offender to authorities, seek counseling and follow through in court?

The other comment has been, very few people will find interest in this story and the movie will simply go away. Go away to where? The production company owes its investors a return on the money invested. DVD's will hit the market complete with a director's cut and added scenes that will cater to the sick and twisted. It will not be hard to package this and sell it to millions of pedophiles.

That's right I said millions. Take a look at the internet traffic on the "legal child porn" site I mentioned above. The numbers of people flocking to that site is in the millions. Most of whom are paying $30 a month to have access to it. And there is no nudity, none! Just children posing in bathing suits and revealing clothing while they arch their backs, bend over, and suck on a finger or phallic.

A DVD of the sweet, innocent, Dakota Fanning being raped, fondling a 10 year old boy, dancing about in her underwear will easily recoup the reported 5 million dollar cost to film the movie.

The other argument is that whatever was shot will not be anything of sexually explicit material.

But the federal law regarding "sexually explicit" defines it as “actual or simulated”
(A) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;
(B) bestiality;
(C) masturbation;
(D) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or
(E) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any
person.

more on federal law and child pornography

Some of these "legal" modeling sites have already attracted the attention of law enforcement. Earlier this year, prosecutors obtained a guilty plea on child pornography charges from Sheila L. Sellinger, then of Shoals, Ind., who had been selling photographs of her 10-year-old daughter on a modeling Web site. Last month, Ms. Sellinger was sentenced to almost 12 years in prison.

All of the photographs taken of her daughter and displayed on the internet were of her clothed. Not one nude and yet the Mom is going to prison for 12 years.

According to the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, total federal prosecutions of child pornography and abuse cases rose 358%, from 344 cases in FY 1995 to 1,576 cases in FY 2005, and the increase in prosecutions continues unabated. Likewise, the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS) within the Department's Criminal Division increased its caseload, including child pornography cases and investigations, by more than 400% over three years.

Beginning to feel the heat now?

MUST GO TO THIS LINK -> http://bluelineradio.com/lilamber806.html