- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Girls Do Porn guy is a fugitive now.
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:28 pm to fightin tigers
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:28 pm to fightin tigers
The end of the article is pretty bad. Says the girls tried to leave and they wouldn't let them and basically forced them to sign the contract that they wouldn't let them read. Not sure if it's trafficking, but it's certainly shady AF.
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:28 pm to Sentrius
quote:
And a court of law agrees with that and gave a lot of frick you money to those girls.
Agreed. Civil cases were completely justified.
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:28 pm to fightin tigers
You'll have to forgive bob. In an effort to empathize and show solidarity with the plight of females, he started peeing sitting down, but all those toxic males pee on the seat so he's a hot little potato right now.
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:29 pm to MrJimBeam
quote:
Not sure if it's trafficking, but it's certainly shady AF.
Shady, sleazy, assholes, many other words to describe it.
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:29 pm to BigPerm30
quote:
Now it makes sense why he never showed his face in the videos.
I don't think he was the stunt cock.
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:32 pm to Sentrius
quote:
The GDP crew was the furthest thing from that when they told them that video would be distributed in some faraway land instead of on the internet for anyone, anywhere to see and then bullies them into signing some half assed legalese that was never going to hold up in court.
Speaks volumes to the naivete of these young ladies to think that even if the videos were distributed in some far away land that there was no possible chance they'd ever end up on the internet.
I'm not defending the GDP guys, but to act like the women who did these videos aren't exactly innocent victims either.
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:32 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
"Sex trafficking" might be the most overhyped issue of the last 5 years
LEO/the state knows they're losing the "war on drugs" and this is the next engine for investigations and seizures
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:35 pm to blueboy
I've seen those video's on different sites, I never had the impression girls were being "forced" to do anything.
They appeared to be "all in".... LoL pun intended
They appeared to be "all in".... LoL pun intended
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:35 pm to SlowFlowPro
Stossel did a good video on it recently. The people that wrote the study that "experts" get their statistics from said that study shouldn't be used as evidence of a sex trafficking problem.
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:35 pm to fightin tigers
That isn’t the basis for the trafficking charges.
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:36 pm to elposter
I watch Ms. Colorado this morning. Great tits.
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:37 pm to Pechon
I find it pretty crazy how little money some of them made doing this stuff. Who would ruin your life for $800-1000 or whatever they got paid?
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:46 pm to MrJimBeam
They also went on a revenge porn rampage when the girls later objected.
From the 187 page civil ruling, which details each of the 22 plaintiffs' experiences.
LINK
quote:
She sent an email to an address she found on the GirlsDoPorn website, but this time she received a response-a cease and desist letter from Panakos Law threatening to seek a restraining order. At this point, Jane Doe I retained Mr. O'Brien, who contacted Mr. Sadock on October 28, 2015 requesting copies of the agreements at issue, which were not produced at that time.
Within days, students, professors, and deans at her law school began receiving calls and emails referencing or containing links to her video. Approximately 60 emails of this type were sent to her law school. When Jane Doe I received a threatening phone call, she began to fear for her safety and so reached out to her dean for assistance and filed a police report. On November 20, 2015, Jane Doe I received a message from someone forwarding her an article about her from TheDirty.com, a popular gossip website, which was also forwarded to her law school. This article, viciously attacked Jane Doe I and, importantly, contained an accusation that she "escorts in Vegas over the summer." This detail led Jane Doe I to believe that the article came from either Garcia or Wolfe, who were the only two people in the room when Garcia encouraged her to say on the video that she was an escort in Vegas.
In or around the end of December 2015, the Court finds that Pratt, disguised as "Ann Fairchild," began reaching out to important people in Jane Doe 1 's life and informing them about the video. He sent an email disclosing the video to the law firm where she was working and to her college soccer coach, as well as a Facebook message to her sister.
Plaintiffs' cyber security expert Charles DeBarber concluded that the probability that the Ann Fairchild account was operated by anyone other than Michael Pratt was "way past lottery odds." He testified that after sending "honeypots" (emails that contain a mechanism that creates an auto-response when opened) to mike@BLL-media.com and to the Ann Fairchild account and receiving responses to both including IP address and VPN information, "there was no other reasonable conclusion but the same person behind that BLL Media [account] was the same as Ann Fairchild." Given that the two "pings" had "the same IP address for that VPN and the same user-agent string [which roughly identifies the type of device] within six minutes," there was no other reasonable conclusion.
From the 187 page civil ruling, which details each of the 22 plaintiffs' experiences.
LINK
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:46 pm to Placebeaux
quote:
Good. Porn needs to be eliminated from this earth. Humanity cant take the next step if this cancer is not delt with.
Talk about a hot take
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:50 pm to fallguy_1978
quote:
Who would ruin your life for $800-1000 or whatever they got paid?
A lot of people ruin theirs for free. I like watching amateur and homemade at times.
This post was edited on 1/13/20 at 1:52 pm
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:51 pm to Speedy G
Imagine being so fat and pathetic with women that you’d feel the need to defend these guys or be offended that they’re charged. Just sad.
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:53 pm to blueboy
So what part of "we're going to pay you $5k to frick this guy on camera and then we're going to put it on the internet so we can make money too" was confusing to these gals?
Posted on 1/13/20 at 1:54 pm to brass2mouth
quote:
I guess that explains why all their videos are off pornhub.
Fun fact:
Search GDP
Posted on 1/13/20 at 2:13 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
quote:
And a court of law agrees with that and gave a lot of frick you money to those girls.
Agreed. Civil cases were completely justified.
Awarded money, not gave. They probably don't have nearly that much money to even pay out and you can't get more money out of then than what they already have, especially when they're locked up in prison for likely a long time.
Posted on 1/13/20 at 2:17 pm to Steadyhands
Yes, ironically, the girls made the settlement impossible by pursuing criminal charges, especially if the latter is the reason they fled the country. Those guys won't be free and making any money for a long time, if ever, and certainly not $13 mil.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News