Archive for the ‘Florida’ Category

Monday Links

Monday, February 7th, 2011
  • After an anonymous tip, a female teacher in Ohio is accused of having sex with five of her male students. She “faces up to 81 years in jail if she is convicted of 16 counts of sexual battery and three offenses involving an underage person.” The sexual “battery” charge presumes that the sex was unwanted.  I’m guessing that’s probably not the case (although reality does not play a major roll when it comes to the legalities of sex with  minors).
  • Florida is going to consider banning “simulated” obscenity, whether clothed or unclothed, in material accessible to minors.  Perhaps next year they will outlaw having dirty thoughts within 1000 feet of a minor.  No more suggestive cheer leading moves or dancing in Florida.
  • to minors by adding a clause that says that “a suspected sexual predator purposely and knowingly sent obscene electronic messages to a minor”.   This is apparently a attempt to reconcile free speech rights with their desire to restrict free speech rights.
  • Biblical porn: “My lover thrust his hand through the hole, and my insides groaned because of him.”  Surprise!  The Bible is conflicted about sex!

Is Judd manipulating the law for fame and glory?

Sunday, December 26th, 2010

If you’ve been keeping up with this story, you know that Polk County, Florida, Sheriff Grady Judd had Colorado resident, Phillip Greaves, arrested last Monday for mailing a book called “The Pedophile’s Guide to Love and Pleasure: A Child-Lover’s Code of Conduct” to Florida cops.

It should be noted that Greaves is not accused of pedophilia or any other act of injuring a child.  He simply wrote a book that discussed the topic.

And the man who had him arrested?  Well here is what Sheriff Judd says about the case:

“This has nothing to do with free speech and everything to do with obscenity,” Judd said. “We had a law in Florida that applied. We only needed jurisdiction.”

So, not only is Sheriff Judd completely ignorant of the historical conflict between obscenity laws and free speech, he sees absolutely nothing wrong with enforcing Florida state laws on Colorado residents.

When it comes to egotistical idiocy, Judd is clearly off the charts.  And, of course, who pays for that idiocy?  Well, certainly not the idiot.  Nope.  Phillip Greaves must sit in jail waiting for court system to throw out the charges, which is a near inevitability.  But  Judd will be a hero because there is no such thing as being too hard on anyone accused of a crime against children.  Innocence or guilt does not factor into the lynch mob mentality which is the force that modulates the public in cases like this.

Finally, as reported in AVN, in order to extradite Greaves, it was necessary to charge him with a felony, but his book apparently doesn’t violate any of the felony provisions of the law under which he was charged.  In order to rise to the level of a felony, the book would have to include pictures of actual children.

This apparent manipulation by Florida law enforcement of its own statutes could undermine the case and lead to even bigger headaches for the County.

Judd in his rush to exploit the sensational story to his own ends might wind up being sued (which really only penalizes the taxpayers).

The story, said Walters, was a national one even before Judd stuck his nose into it, which he probably did for the very fact that it was national. But the national appeal of such a case could also provide Greaves with a legal defense team that he could never in his life afford. He will probably be forced to use a public defender at first, said Walters, but soon, he expects to see a team of top drawer First Amendment lawyers descend upon the state and offer Greaves their services.

As is often the case, the porn industry is at the forefront of the fight to defend the First Amendment from those who would gladly trample it to satisfy their own narrow moral or political agenda.

In the end, as I have often written, the First Amendment contains no exceptions for obscenity.  The Supreme Court pulled obscenity exemption out of its collective ass.  It’s like saying that the First Amendment protects free speech unless its really offensive to enough people, in which case we will pretend there is no First Amendment.  The fact is, of course, the First Amendment is designed specifically to protect offensive speech.

Conflating speech and behavior

Tuesday, December 21st, 2010

One of the common characteristics of moral crusades is that the boundary between speech and behavior is often lost.  A recent case in point came after the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks when someone’s lack of support for the U.S. response to that attack automatically branded them as being an enemy (George W. Bush: “You’re either with us or you’re with the terrorists”).

Even more common is the assumption that merely refusing to mimic the  popular condemnation of an act, necessarily means that person is willing to engage in it.  Examples of such witch hunts include McCarthyism in the 40s and the daycare sex abuse hysteria of the 80s and 90s.  Historically such cases are almost universally recognized as having been driven by an irrational mob mentality.  But when they are in full swing, they attract huge popular support by people who believe they are the righteous protectors of civilization.

Such has been the recent case with the media fueled social crusade against Craigslist and others.  One of those “others” is Phillip Greaves whose name made it into the headlines recently when he offered a book on amazon.com called “The Pedophile’s Guide to Love and Pleasure: A Child-Lover’s Code of Conduct”. As I wrote back in November, Amazon was pressured to remove the book which it finally did after some token resistance.

Mr Greaves was arrested on Monday.  The Citizen Media Law Project provides an interesting characterization of the event:

The Orlando Sentinel reports that Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd had Mr. Greaves arrested in Pueblo, Colorado on obscenity charges.Lets remember that Grady Judd’s jurisdiction is home to meth labs, cops who diddle children, and a pretty high incest rate.

Despite the “real crime” in his jurisdiction, Judd instructed his detectives to request an autographed copy of the book. Mr. Greaves obliged and Judd used that as his justification for having Greaves indicted on obscenity charges in his little caliphate of inbred-methistan.

Remember, this is simply for expressing his thoughts about about pedophilia.  I have not read of any evidence that Mr Greaves has ever harmed any child.

Greaves told ABC News last month he wasn’t trying to promote pedophilia and was not himself a pedophile: “I’m not saying I want them around children, I’m saying if they’re there, that’s how I want them to [behave].” (source)

The entire article, written by Marc J. Randazza, is well worth reading for its uncompromising support for free speech and for the author’s clear understanding that behavior and speech are different things.  While criminal behavior can be prosecuted, simply talking about it is protected by the First Amendment.

The implications of this arrest should outrage you far more than any child molestation incident. That is not to minimize child molestation, nor is it me just trying to be provocative. If a child gets molested, our republic stands. If petty little white-trash sheriffs like Grady Judd can find a book they don’t like and have the author hauled off to jail for it, the First Amendment means nothing. Judd’s offense is compounded by the fact that Mr. Greaves does not live in Florida and has no connection to Polk County except that he mailed a book there at the express request of a law enforcement officer who was clearly trying to manufacture jurisdiction.

I like Mr Randazza’s writing style.  He is outraged (as all of us who value the First Amendment should be).

Miami cops crack down on immorality

Sunday, November 21st, 2010

Miami cops arrested Carlos Rodriguez for soliciting prostitution on November 9th.   Under the heading of unique physical features, the arrest report notes, “Half a Head”. What would we do without our Blue Knights saving society from those who want to get laid?

While I write endlessly about the persecution of women who sell sex, it’s much more rare that I comment on the other victims of society’s war on sex, the customer.

It’s no secret that anti-prostitution crusaders advocate the state injecting itself into and regulating our most intimate and private relationships.  While they rant about how all prostitution is coercion, they don’t give it a second thought when they use the threat of jail to force everyone to follow their narrow intolerant moral code.  They summarily decree that the moment money is involved, women are being coerced or exploited.  To them the only acceptable terms for a sexual relationship are mutual attraction.

They dismiss the idea that that puts millions of people, of which Mr Rodriguez is only one, at something of a disadvantage.  Laws against prostitution sadistically deny one of humanity’s most pleasurable and intimate interactions to a class of people who are only likely to experience it through the services of a prostitute. That would include many handicapped people, those who have been maimed by war or accidents, those with serious birth defects, the home bound, the bed-ridden, and the just plain ugly (such as myself).

To spell it out, laws against prostitution specifically single out disadvantaged people for persecution.  As long as man has walked the earth society has been defining the powerless as throwaways, unworthy of the rights and privileges that the rest of us take for granted.  Every generation of Americans self-righteously proclaims their abhorrence of witch hunts, moral crusades, and lynchings of past generations, even as they enthusiastically engage in the current ones.  Like the very people who perpetrated that history of marginalizing those they didn’t like, they don’t recognize what they’re doing.  It’s never called persecution by those who doing it.

As one commenter so eloquently wrote a while back, no “normal” person needs to buy sex.  The implication is that sex is a privilege reserved only for so-called normal people.  If you’ve ever been in a discussion about the demand side of prostitution, some moron will invariably make the remark, “I’ve never had to pay for it”.  The implication is that, “I’m among the class of people that women will have sex with without having to pay for it”.  The pure naivety of such an assertion  is stunning.  I don’t know too many people who would dispute that wealth (coupled with generosity) usually plays a part in the dynamic between men and women, regardless of whether an explicit transaction occurs.

The war on prostitution is not just a crusade against a woman’s right to own and control her own body.  It’s also a systematic program of persecution aimed at a minority of the population that no one gives a shit about.  It’s the tyranny of the majority in action. And there is nothing moral, benevolent, or heroic about it.

Nigger banned from Florida High School

Thursday, November 18th, 2010

This has actually been in the news for several days, but it’s not sex related, so I hadn’t intended to post about it.  I have changed my mind.

When the kids at Flagler Palm Coast High School wanted to perform the play, To Kill a Mockingbird, an apparently anonymous “school committee” shut the idea down because the play uses “a racial slur”.  The racial slur in question is the word “nigger” or, if you’re a member of any mainstream media outlet “the N-word“.

Keep in mind as you read the following quote from the Daytona Beach News-Journal that the person commenting leads a mentoring program and was one of those who recommended canceling the show:

John Winston, who said he’d spent the last five years “in the trenches” at the district, said he was disgusted with the news media’s coverage of the issue. The press has painted the show’s cancellation as a censorship issue when it is not, he said.

“It’s not about the ‘N-word,’ ” he said. “It’s about education.”

Well, here’s a wake-up call for you, Mr. Winston.  Yes, it is censorship and yes, it is about the so-called N-word and your comments to the contrary insult the intelligence of everyone they’re directed at.

Why is it that people who work with kids and should know better, always underestimate their intelligence?  Not only are kids probably far better able to handle the play’s language than the adults, they are almost certainly able to see that what’s being passed off as “concern” is really irrational paranoia.

Here we have school officials banning a play that condemns racism and then can’t even bring itself to utter the very word they are banning it for, as if the mere arrangement of letters, absent any negative context, can cause harm.  By this process, the school is training their students in the art of being perpetually paranoid about saying or writing the wrong thing.  They are teaching children to feel as if they must walk on eggshells in everything they say, because someone somewhere might be offended.

That educators don’t understand the rudimentary concept that words are simply tools of communications is stunning.  Absent any intent on the part of the speaker to offend, words do not have the power on their own to offend.

In the 16th century, upon the condemnation of nudity in religious art by the Council of Trent, a painter named Daniele da Volterra was commissioned to paint clothes on the nude figures of Michelangelo’s art in the Sistine Chapel.  That painter will forever be known for that act.  Likewise, Mr Winston and his fellow committee members have established their own legacy of idiocy.

Miscelaneous Links

Wednesday, November 10th, 2010
  • Movie about ethically challenged anti-prostitution crusader and rising CNN star, Eliot Spitzer says he is a victim of overzealous investigators who caught him doing the same stuff he so enthusiastically prosecuted as New York Attorney General.
  • Probabtion has been terminated early for former madam Kristen Davis, who purportedly supplied hookers to the aforementioned New York Governor Spitzer and who, unlike Spitzer, did prison time (and was not offered her own show on CNN).

Mistaken for a prostitute, woman spends 36 hours behind bars

Thursday, September 9th, 2010

An Orlando woman was arrested an jailed for 36 hours because she happened to have the same name as a wanted prostitute.  From the Miami Herald:

An Orlando mother was arrested after disembarking from a cruise ship, mistaken for a suspected prostitute wanted in Central Florida.

Thirty-one-year-old Paola Londono spent more than 36 hours in a South Florida jail before her attorney could persuade a judge to let her out. She had been mistaken for a woman with the same name, but who was seven years younger, five inches taller and looked completely different.

I guess we should all be impressed with the fact that it only took the cops 36 hours to figure out that they had the wrong person.  So much for computer data bases.

Remember those airport body scanners?

Wednesday, August 4th, 2010

Remember how the TSA assured everyone that the images would not be stored?  Well guess what?

According to Gizmodo:

It turns out the the US Marshals Service has surreptitiously saved tens of thousands of body scan images from a checkpoint at a Florida courthouse. And they’re probably not the only ones.

The TSA recently disclosed that they require all airport body scanners to be able to store and transmit images for “testing, training, and evaluation purposes.”

Remember, these are the same people (ie: government) who tell us to trust them when they claim to have authority to determine what we’re permitted to see and hear on the internet or in print or over the airwaves.

Sexting: There ought to be a law.

Friday, April 9th, 2010

Sexting is the new crack.   It’s the latest epidemic that is “destroying our youth”.  If you Google it, you will be swamped with statistics that tell you one in five teens has done it.  And in virtually all states, those one in five teens could be prosecuted as criminals (probably felons).

When it comes to news about sexting laws, North Carolina, Arizona, Florida, and Virgina pop up at the top of the search results just for this weeks sexting news items.  And rare is the voice that cautions against over-reacting.

The latest trend is the rush to pass new legislation that creates a special crime of sexting just so prosecutors aren’t forced (yes, forced!) to prosecute mere children as predatory child sexual abusers.  Not content to just leave it to parents and schools to instruct children as to the dangers of sending nude photos to other kids, state legislators feel compelled to make the activity a matter for state control.  And the only tool (blunt instrument, actually) the state has to do that is to treat it as a crime.

There is no doubt that in today’s world, playing doctor would be considered a warning sign that someone is on the path to sexual  deviancy.  The first response to any sex-related activity by kids that elicits press coverage is to pass a new law.  Laws are modern civilization’s answer to the wishing well.

Pass a law= problem solved.

The kids who are sending these pictures obviously don’t share the fear and hysteria of  adults and the serious criminal ramifications don’t occur to them.   Any why would it?  How can sending a picture of yourself to someone else make you a criminal?  It defies logic, but just as the seriousness doesn’t occur to kids, the panicky over-reaction doesn’t occur to adults.

The bottom line is that kids are injured far less by the act of sexting  than they are from society’s paranoid over-reaction to simple nudity.

Tampa area has a new erotic art venue

Sunday, March 14th, 2010

According to the Daily Loaf:

Capricorn Studios is the lovechild of husband-and-wife team Larry and Daphne Haines. While neither is an artist nor has experience operating a gallery, they have an abundance of artist friends who needed a place to display their work.

There are some pictures taken during the opening here.

There is no doubt that private galleries are really where the arts are supported.  Government support of the arts is usually nothing more than a politically motivated public relations move to garner PR for local businesses and votes for politicians at taxpayers’ expense.  Regardless of First Amendment protections, government support always comes with strings and artists tend not to bite the hand that feeds them.   What you get from government is a place to display art that is devoid of any provocative message, discouraging artists from producing such work.  Such treatment reinforces a perspective that real art is what they hang in city museums and that anything that challenges cultural norms deserves backroom isolation.

Congratulations to Larry and Daphne Haines.  May their new venture be a success.  If I lived there I would have begged for an invite to the opening.