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
Blog powered by Typepad

Photo Albums


August 11, 2006



Your local news is reporting there will be no further investigation. My work here is done.

And here's an online source proving that there will be no nudity in the rape scene:

http://www.wwaytv3. com/Global/story.asp ?S=5269150&nav=0zHSW Jqm&pass=1#poll55133

The pertinent info:
"The production coordinator for "Hounddog" ; says Dakota fanning was wearing a body suit during the entire rape scene and there was a child welfare worker on the set, along with Dakota's agent and her mother.
The production coordinator estimates the rape scene will only take up about a minute of the entire feature-length film. She says it's shot above the shoulders, using Dakota's facial expressions to tell the story"

Told ya so!

Tre Benson

I am as relieved as it seems to be that there was no nudity by the child actress on set.

I know the Production Coordinator and her husband and have no reason to doubt she said what was reported. But I also know that a Production Coordinator is not always on set, she works in an office sort of as an administrative assistant to the Producers.

I have never said that I have personal knowledge that the child was nude in the scenes. There have been many conflicting stories as to what she wore in what scene and others where she supposedly appears nude. The New York Daily News was the original source regarding any report of nudity. But to me there is very little difference between a child wearing panties and pasties, or an invisible body suit and nudity. Would you wear a body suit to the mall and feel dressed? Would someone mistake you as being nude if they were to see you "dressed" that way?

The law that has caused this to be investigated by authorities (NCGS 14-190.16 (a) (4)) is the Sexual Exploitation of a Minor. The Law states as follows:

"It shall be the First Degree Sexual Exploitation of a Minor, a serious Felony Offense in which records, photographs, films, develops, or duplicates for sale or pecuniary gain material that contains a visual representation depicting a minor engaged in sexual activity."

There is nothing about nudity being a requirement for a violation. Sexual activity can and does take place when people have clothes on. Even if those clothes are camouflaged to look as if the actor is nude. The law also states that only a representation of a sex act need take place. Meaning that the act of sex can be one of pretend, of acting it out.

I am quite certain that because of the eyewitness reports and the script that these allegations will be thoroughly investigated and a determination of whether or not a crime took place will be forthcoming.

I have been very careful and deliberate in what I have disclosed and when I have disclosed it. I work in the film business and have many friends that worked on this movie and do not want to haphazardly repeat anything I hear without some verification. This is a business I have enjoyed for 18 years and would like to continue to work in it for a few more without being blackballed as a troublemaker.

I like you am a Dakota fan, she is a wonderful actress. And I believe we both want what is best for her. The last thing I want is for someone to take advantage of her in a criminal manner. I think you will agree with me on that.

That is why I have made the effort to bring attention to this publicly. Address the rumors head on, take a stand and seek a solution.

Is or was this a crime? Were there other parts in the film that crossed the line and should be prosecuted? I don't know, that's for law enforcement to decide. But if something like this is not a crime, maybe it should be and maybe legislation should be enacted to protect future children from having to endure what little, innocent Dakota will soon realize was a terrible mistake of judgment on her handlers part.

And one more quick thing since you brought it up, a social welfare worker is a tutor, a school teacher not someone from Child Protective Services with knowledge of the law.

Hope these clarifications have been of help.

child star

thak you


Dear Tre:

I do believe that Sam-I-Am, in his own sweet way, says it all for the other side.

You know, when I first visited Dakota's fansites back in mid-March, I was impressed by the quality of the children who expressed their love and care for her. I was equally repelled by the viciousness of the punks and perverts who preyed on them in those unregulated, open-forum websites. That's why I stayed to comment on them; to encourage those kids not to give away personal information and not to pick up the foul language of their attackers, as children tend to do on the internet.

So much has changed since July 20th. Since the news of "Hounddog" has broken, the mood of the good kids has evolved into anger, dismay, confusion, denial and just plain heartbreak. Her most active supporters either don't mention her anymore or have gone silent.

And who are her new supporters? Left-wing pseudo-intellectuals like Dakota&ElleFan show up now. Supplementing them are, ironically, the very same punks and pervs who have always been there. Dakota is their heroine, now! What does THAT tell us?

Sam-I-Am represents Dakota's new fan base, now. What a terrible turn in what, at first, had been a heartwarming story of a little girl who, by good fortune and perserverence, had followed her dreams to Hollywood. What a tragic and ugly nightmare it has become.

It may be too late to help this little girl, surrounded as she must be by corrupt, pandering adults. I hope not, but that must be faced. What we can do is make sure, to the best of our abilities, that this sorrowful end of innocence will not befall others like her or threaten the innocence of children elsewhere.


"There he goes again."

Dude, speak for yourself.

Tre Benson

Had to delete samiam's post. Sorry I did not catch it until earlier.


Why not just stand up, be a man, and admit you jumped the gun? What's with all the weasel stuff? Her mom was there, for crying out loud. By the way, I think you ought to give some thought as to why you would consider the rape of a child a sex act. It's not.

Tre Benson

I am not sure how I jumped the gun.

Some mothers pimp their children David.

OKEECHOBEE, Fla. -- A mother is under arrest, accused of selling a 12-year-old daughter into prostitution and trading a 14-year-old daughter for a car.

The 39-year-old woman, whose name is not being released to protect the girls' identity, is charged with two counts of aggravated child abuse and two counts of sexual performance by a child. She was being held Tuesday in the Okeechobee County Jail on $400,000 bond.

Both girls have been turned over to the Department of Children & Families, the Okeechobee News reported for Wednesday editions.

You know there are hundreds more stories just as horrible. It are the ones where a parent manipulates and threatens and uses a child we rarely ever hear about. The ones where children are not protected by child labor laws and those who are placed into the workforce at 5 and 6 years old that are sometimes equally upsetting and yet few are aware of such abuses. They buy clothing from China and car parts from Mexico where some workers still have some of their baby teeth. And people will purchase tickets to see the new Jackie Coogan's who are many times out lawyered by their parents and producers to be left with anything by the time they come of age. It is a tough world for kids and if I seem over zealous to you then perhaps you should ignore me and those like me.

But you did make a very important statement worthy of debate.

You said "By the way, I think you ought to give some thought as to why you would consider the rape of a child a sex act. It's not."

Is rape an act of sex? Or is it an act of violence, an assault?

I thought about this before in another child case.

Some women's advocates such as those quoting the mythology of the late Andrea Dworkin would say that any act of sex with a woman, not to mention a child, is rape.

Some scientist would argue that a sex act is the attempt at procreation by a male and female and not some sport one plays with another utilizing their genitalia.

There was great debate a while back whether or not "oral sex" was indeed a sex act. In some countries where virginity has such an importance, young girls will frequently commit anal and oral sex acts to protect their status as a virgin.

So is the rape of a child a sex act? Ask someone smarter than me. In my opinion it is. And I am sure in NAMBLA's opinion it is a ritualistic right of passage. There seem to always be two sides to anything.

"A suburban Cleveland man accused of sexually assaulting nine disabled boys told a judge Wednesday that his apartment was a religious sanctuary where smoking marijuana and having sex with children are sacred rituals protected by civil rights laws."

I guess there is someone, somewhere that could argue anything to death.

I barely have the time to change my son's diapers so I guess you will have to do your bidding elsewhere.

Good luck.


Hi, Tre.

That remark about the rape of a child not being a sex act was both incredible and chilling at the same time. Thanks also for reminding me about Mz. Dworkin's infamous little quote. Both of those statements serve to remind us of the alien universe that some must dwell in to accept such concepts.

One thing I remember, as far as the "oral" thing is concerned. Not long after the Monica Lewinsky affair was reported on, very disturbing stories started coming out of public schools across the country. It seems that children of middle school age, newly exposed to the very concept from watching the TV coverage, began to emulate it. After all, the President did it! I remember how sickened I was to think of little girls degrading themselves like that because they thought that it was the thing they were expected to do.

That's the power that the media and the movies have on impressionable young people. Let's consider that along with the content and message of "Hounddog" and the films that will doubtlessly follow it if released. It's okay to dance nude for boys and... other things, as long as you get a concert ticket for your trouble. Dakota did!

Far-fetched? For the great majority of kids, yes. However, all too many WILL start to think that way. The precent is clear. It's the power of suggestion on developing young minds.

Anita Leiter

I am a concern fan. I just read the script and now my stomach is in knots. I am a victim of molestation. So much of this brought back memories and feelings I had.

This is a sick movie. I am disgusted. I don't care what anyone says, these kids are being molested. Their inocenences is taken away. I don't care she had a body suite on. She still had a person on top of her moving in a sexual matter. The worst part she had people there watching it happen.

Then having the kids play with each other, I have agree that when a child has been expose at a young age they do do this, but they just open that door for those kids. YOU DON'T DO THAT! They don't know the life of pain they just caused those kids.

My heart goes out to thoses kids and the kids of the world if this movie goes public. I am afraid there WILL be more victims joining me.


God bless you, Anita. We keep hearing over and over again how this movie is good because it will "raise awareness". I've always maintained (again and again!) that it will merely exacerbate the problem by twisting the thinking of young people and enabling perverts in their sickness. I don't mention enough about the heartbreak it will bring to those who have experienced this ultimate horror for themselves. Thank you for your witness. One can only hope that the children used in this disgusting film will be able to recover from it.

who is the leader of crips

The comments to this entry are closed.