Did Jailed ?Girls Gone Wild? Founder Get Raw Deal?
I haven’t followed the saga of “Girls Gone Wild” video empire founder Joe Francis (pictured, right), but Matt, a reader, says Francis is getting a raw deal. The story is ‘Girls Gone Wild’ founder gets jail time (Associated Press, 4/23/07). Matt writes:
“I think it’s a classic case of legal misandry, personally. Let’s break it down. The girls in question:
*Lied about their ages to enter a drinking establishment where they knew GGW was going to be shooting. (GGW rents the club for the night. They don’t just show up and start handing out shirts.)
*Showed fake IDs and signed waivers.
*Probably consumed alcohol.
*Sued GGW, even though they signed waivers releasing the use of their images.
Joe Francis:
*Inadvertently taped underage women and sold the videos.
*Is losing a large amount of money due to court costs and having to remove and replace any videos featuring the girls that may have been sold, not to mention the settlements he’s going to have to pay.
*Is going to spend a month in prison because he lost his temper (understandably) over losing a frivolous lawsuit.
The reaction I’ve seen most is that he’s a smut-peddling sleazebag who deserves what he got. From my point of view, he was conducting business as usual and was taken advantage of. Last I heard, being a smut-peddling sleazebag wasn’t against the law, so why is he being punished and they aren’t?
‘Girls Gone Wild’ founder gets jail time
By MELISSA NELSON
Associated Press
Apr 23, 2007
Blowing his nose and wiping away tears, the multimillionaire founder of the “Girls Gone Wild” video empire pleaded guilty to contempt of court Monday and was sentenced to 35 days in jail.
Joe Francis, who was sued by seven women who were minors when filmed, apologized to the judge for yelling at the plaintiffs during settlement talks.
“I am sorry for my behavior. It was wrong. I had heard about appeals and things and I was confused. I am sorry, I really am,” said Francis, 34.
Francis drew the contempt charge during negotiations to settle the federal lawsuit brought after his production company filmed the women at Panama City Beach in 2003.
Attorneys for the women said Francis, who makes a reported $29 million a year taping topless women for his videos, lost his temper in negotiations and yelled obscenities at them.
U.S. District Judge Richard Smoak ordered Francis to settle the case or go to jail for contempt of court. When talks fell through, Francis lashed out at Smoak in the media, calling him a “judge gone wild” and questioning the judge’s authority to order a settlement. (more…)
|
| More from Glenn Sacks
Stumble It!
April 27th, 2007 at 7:18 am
he was nailed for the same rason men who pay hookers get fined, their name in the paper and a rap sheet. women are victims and men are control freeks. get it?
if a chick wears a skirt up to her arss and you take a look, its not ok unless she says it is.
if a women tells an off color joke, we laugh. if we tell the same joke, its inappropriate at best or perhaps office sexual harassment if there is leverage to be had by and for the ladies.
it is as simple as this: women are “not” held accountable for their actions and deeds at “any” age. not by society. not by parents. not by men in general. doesn’t happen.
April 27th, 2007 at 7:29 am
Same deal with Traci Lords many years back. She lied about her age, did a porno and all of the retailers dristributors and producer paid big time.
Their arguement that they couldn’t possibly know was brushed aside.
April 27th, 2007 at 8:06 am
Sor Juana Ines de la Cruz, 17th C, ( a Nun)
O who is more to blame,
He who sins for pay
Or he who pays for sin?
Joe Francis gets it coming and going.
April 27th, 2007 at 8:52 am
I thought this was a civil court matter, however the judge “ordered” him to settle or go to jail. I thought that in civil matters that if a settlement can’t be reached then the matter goes to trial. Seems to me that the legal system has screwed another man again. Regardless of what you think of his line of work I think what the judge has done to him is highly questionable.
April 27th, 2007 at 11:25 am
I agree with Gvil, with the information provided it seems as if the Judge exceeded his authority.