Paul Little, a.k.a. “Max Hardcore” was sentenced to 46 months in federal prison for producing dirty movies. While I’m sure that the ghost of Andrea Dworkin is doing backflips of joy, the founding fathers are rolling in their graves.
Glenn Greenwald had this to say in Slate:
So, to recap, in the Land of the Free: if you’re an adult who produces a film using other consenting adults, for the entertainment of still other consenting adults, which merely depicts fictional acts of humiliation and degradation, the DOJ will prosecute you and send you to prison for years. The claim that no real pain was inflicted will be rejected; mere humiliation is enough to make you a criminal. But if government officials actually subject helpless detainees in their custody to extreme mental abuse, degradation, humiliation and even mock executions long considered “torture” in the entire civilized world, the DOJ will argue that they have acted with perfect legality and, just to be sure, Congress will hand them retroactive immunity for their conduct. That’s how we prioritize criminality and arrange our value system. (source)
I am constrained by the rules regulating the Florida Bar from commenting on the Judge in this case. However, the Tampa Bay Online reports that she seemed to have a lot of trouble differentiating between acting and the real world. (source)
By Email
By RSS Feed
marcorandazza
Tara Warrington
blevinsj
AGhostInTheSnow
Christopher Harbin
jesschristensen
Tatiana
Bob
jfischer1975
smoconnor
mattcsanchez
tarakirstenk
October 6, 2008 at 11:01 am |
Not only is this problematic from a Constitutional standpoint but the rule applied would seem to include: Jackass, Punk’d, America’s Funniest Home Videos, etc… See, the videos portray “sadistic conduct. …This is clearly degrading, clearly humiliating and intended to be so.”
Not to mention, those being “humiliated” are consenting adults (this cannot be said enough). If I consent to the act and consent to the video and consent to the paycheck for all the above, then what is the problem?
Btw, does anyone else see the irony in this comment: “Clearly, there seemed to be pain.” ….Clearly Leonardo DiCaprio seemed to die in Titanic.
October 6, 2008 at 6:15 pm |
An appeal is forthcoming I presume?
October 7, 2008 at 5:51 am |
I would assume so, but I have no inside information at this time.
October 7, 2008 at 12:17 pm |
“clearly there seemed to be pain” yes is an ironic statement …but what you have to realize is that the girls ARE in pain… has anyone ever seen a max hardcore movie… the girls are clearly being taken advantage of.. and are not old enough or have the right mind to make those decisions ..
there is a reason max/ paul is surrounded by body guards where ever he goes…
he is now going to experience what all the girls have felt …. sodomy of the finest caliber !!!
i understand the law is the law and unfortunaltey there are alot of grey areas…
but in this case… i have to admit i’m glad
October 7, 2008 at 12:40 pm |
Well, David, I’d like to see your evidence that “the girls are clearly being taken advantage of.” When the only evidence provided was of Max Hardcore’s actresses claiming that they willingly participated and enjoyed the experience.
Your second moronic statement — that the girls are not old enough or have the right mind to make these decisions — what is your evidence of this? If they are 18 years old, they are old enough. If they are somehow mentally ill, where is that allegation, let alone proof?
Finally, I’ve never seen Mr. Little “surrounded by body guards.”
If you’re glad to see someone else get raped, lets hope that one day you find yourself buggered against your will.
October 7, 2008 at 2:07 pm |
Your comments about Judge Bucklew are uncalled for. Little’s videos were deemed legally obscene by the jury which convicted him. She followed the sentencing guidelines in imposing the sentence. If you have a problem with the law, write your congressman. But dont blame the Judge for following the law. That is her job and she did it correctly. I believe the sentencing enhancement guidelines say that a portrayal of S&M qualifies for the enhancement. I am not sure of the exact language, but it definitely includes the word portrayal. Whether or not the girls involved say they enjoyed it is not terribly relevant. You would expect those comments from a newspaper, but not from a lawyer.
October 7, 2008 at 2:17 pm |
Well “anon” … where did I make any comment about Judge Bucklew?
If you are going to make moronic comments on this blog, at least sign your name. That shithead David at least provided proper contact information for his rape comment.
October 7, 2008 at 3:53 pm |
While, I completely disagree with what “anon” said, outing his school is not cool, imo. I for one value online anonymity. I think it is up to the person to decide what information to disclose. If you wish to have a blog that requires identifying yourself before making a comment, I’m sure you can set it up to do so. However, as it is now, you permit anonymity, and I think you should respect that, even if the anonymous poster leaves a moronic message.
October 7, 2008 at 3:57 pm |
Actually, as it is set up, it requires you to leave a name and email address. Anon left “fake@yahoo.com.”
While I may have had good reasons, your point is well taken. I’ve deleted that information.
October 7, 2008 at 7:52 pm |
David,
I hope you don’t really feel glad that the constitution was trampled by allowing these charges to be presented to a jury. I’ve never seen a Max Hardcore movie, but I have a hard time viewing censorship of any material involving consenting adults as justifiable under the first amendment.
I may not like the speech that Max Hardcore produces. I may not choose to view it. But I am grateful that he has the right (or should have the right) to make such speech. Which of our liberties will be stripped from us next? When we start allowing rights to be chiseled away, we are stepping on a slippery slope.
December 12, 2008 at 7:53 am |
[...] senator Estes Kefauver, hearings which brought us the laws under which the federal government to this day prosecutes those who produce entertainment intended to be enjoyed by consenting adults, in the [...]
January 2, 2009 at 10:30 pm |
Little should have been locked up a long time ago. His cruelty is so notorious in the porn world that for years he’s had to scour Eastern Europe for girls who never heard of Max Hardcore. From lukeford.com:
In 1992, Little sent performer Pamela Dee to the emergency room at St. Joseph’s Hospital in Burbank “after she suffered vaginal hemorrhaging during a taping,” writes Nick Ravo in the 2/98 ICON magazine. Dee, a writer in Reno, Nevada told Ravo that Paul came up behind her and, without warning, rammed his fist into her vagina. “I never heard of anything like that done to anyone before. I felt ripped open. He also said he would pay my medical bills, but he never did. He could kill someone – he should be behind bars. But no one in the industry criticizes him because he makes a lot of money. He really screwed me up.”
January 21, 2009 at 7:03 pm |
The jury that convicted max was instructed by the judge to enforce the law. Keep in mind that this means it was an unconstitutional jury. The process of judicial instruction of juries was illegal until the year 1895 (the year of the Supreme Court precedent “Sparf and Hansen V. the USA”) – prior to that year, juries were instructed that they had a right to vote their consciences, even if their consciences disagreed with the law.
The proof of the terrible injustice that judicial instruction (of uninformed, gullible Americans) creates is revealed by the fact that the jurors apologized to Max after convicting him. Would they have done so if he were not railroaded by an unconstitutional court?
Jury trials have been eroded in several other ways as well. Take for instance, “voir dire” (prosecutorial jury rigging), which began during civil war times, in an effort to force Northerners to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act. During jury questioning, if you indicate the capacity for critical thinking, or reveal that you know you have more power as a juror than the judge does, then you will be dismissed “for cause”.
Keep in mind that constitutional juries are not weeded for dissenters by the prosecution and judge.
http://www.defendourporn.org/?p=29
For more information on jury rights, see http://www.fija.org
February 4, 2009 at 4:57 am |
Lock him up…dude been taken advantage of “18″ year olds for years., fellas behind bars don’t take kindly to child molestors or rapist…I think Mr. Little will fall into the category of the latter…tough days ahead, and I don’t feel sorry for him.
April 8, 2009 at 12:57 am |
Please, I’m very liberally-minded, but this guy is disgusting. He obviously gets off on the idea of having sex with prepubescent girls and he’s producing movies for people who probably dream of doing that very thing, so to me, he’s an enabler. People watch his movies, get ideas in their sick heads, and that’s why we have ‘To Catch A Predator’.
I’m sure our Founding Fathers are appalled at how the court has just trampled on our beloved Constitution… and sodomized it, and pissed on it, and covered it in vomit.
April 12, 2009 at 7:55 pm |
So is he in or out of prison as of today?
did he appeal?
is he out on bond while he appeals?
what was the last date of a max hardcore video?
shelia
April 14, 2009 at 5:01 pm |
Max Paul Little Hardcore is a piece of garbage that finally got what was coming to him. I don’t mind if people fuck and suck on video for porn but Max’s style of porn only appeals to and inspires demented perverts who want to rape and molest pre-pubescent girls.