More on the Max Hardcore Conviction

Being a member of the Bar is essential to my livelihood, so I can’t comment on a lot of what I think of the Max Hardcore conviction, nor on how the judge conducted the trial.

Mark Draughn at WindyPundit and Rogier van Bakel at Nobody’s Business – they are not members of the Bar. They say what I wish I could.

UPDATE: More articles on the conviction.

Sirkin Discusses Max Hardcore Sentencing

Editorial: The Adult Industry and Max: Time To Walk The Walk

16 Responses to More on the Max Hardcore Conviction

  1. Windypundit says:

    Thanks for the link, and if I run into that Scott Draughon guy, I’ll tell tell him you liked his stuff.

  2. Ooops… I was thinking of someone else. Fixed it!

  3. Derek says:

    My girlfriend assistant-managed one of a chain or adult video stores here in Wisconsin for 7 years. Last night I told her about Max Hardcore getting convicted, and she was happy. Apparently he has a reputation throughout the industry for trying to get women to sign contracts without reading them, neglecting to mention details of contracts, refusing to let women re-negotiate, etc., etc., etc. I told her it didn’t matter if he was a shitbag; that wasn’t the point of the case.

    A discussion ensued in which she defended her opinion that he got what he deserved. I ended with me telling her that my problem wasn’t that he was a bad person; rather that he was convicted and sentenced to jail time not for coersion, breach of contract, assault, misconduct of any variety, or even for being a bad person – he was tried and convicted of selling pornography – made by and for, and purchased by, consenting adults. And that if that becomes a crime simply because someone doesn’t like the movies you make, then we’re all in deep trouble. *sigh* Apparently there are a lot more people than I thought who believe that it’s okay for people to be prosecuted for speech and/or expression that they find offensive. And here I thought that was what the First Amendment was specifically designed to protect…

  4. Your point in your discussion with your girlfriend is well taken. Lets presume, for the sake of argument, that Paul is a terrible bastard. Lets presume that he is everything she says multiplied by 100.

    I am not angry about this verdict and this sentence because I feel badly for Paul Little. I am angry about it because *WE ALL* became less free as a result. I’m not Paul Little’s attorney, nor am I his friend. I’ve never even met the guy. I don’t give a shit if he goes to jail — I give a shit that a room full of weak-minded jurors simply voted on emotion — and I give a shit that some serious Constitutional errors were committed by the court.

    Paul Little can rise to glory in heaven or burn in hell, I don’t care one way or the other. But, my Constitution is sacred to me. It should be to your girlfriend too. You should dump the harpy if she’s that clueless.

  5. Birkler says:

    Not being an American I don’t know much about your constitution but I’ve seen enough movies to know that the first thing that was added to the original document (that’s how I interpret “amendment” anyways) was an assurance that the American people were allowed to say/write/film etc. anything you wanted.. Of course over the years there have had to have been made limitations – to protect children for instance. But as anyone who’ve ever seen pornographic materiel will tell you there is always the “are you old enough to view this” clause (especially on the internet)..

    But it would seem that this is no longer enough..

    So why stop there? If the makers of porn are to be convicted for distribution “smut”, why not prosecute the actors/actresses – I mean they’re the ones who are naked having sex on film.. And while you’re at it I seem to recall a fair few “normal” actors/actresses who’ve shown off their naked bodies on film in non-pornographic movies (Natasha Henstridge in Species from 1995 springs to mind – she’s naked in like 33% of the movie)..

    If you want the opinion of a European outsider you’d be better off if you started prosecuting and convicting the people who make, sell, and use firearms and ammunition – those are the real threat to your society.

    And then maybe remember where your society is headed the next time you stand up and sing about “the land of the free”…

  6. Danni says:

    From Denmark with love… Having seen a lot of Max movies, its a sad day for

    US of A (Land of the decent home of the puritans)

    Sorry Poul (Max Hardcore) Lots of greetings from the true contry of the free… (Denmark)

  7. chris says:

    Free country doesnt mean PPL can do all kinds shits free !! go out and blast bunch ppl, does that count as FREE ??!! Free country means ppl have equal opportunities ! I’m glad he got locked up

  8. Golly, thanks for that intelligent addition to the discussion.

  9. Jenia says:

    I’ve seen a couple of this shitbag films and I’m more then happy that he is locked up, if you watch any of his films you’ll definitely notice that max abuses the girls by any means he can, against their will. I’m sure that those poor girls didn’t know what they getting into but after the shooting starts they can’t stop because they signed on some contract which says that they will pay a major fine if they stop the shooting. Actually he RAPED those girls and the law is on his side (I’m even not sure that this is true, because a person can’t sign a contract by which he will be raped just as a person can’t sign a contract by which he will be killed. But those girls are quite stupid so they think that once they signed there is no way back). I think that he deserves much more severe punishment, they should have judged him as a RAPIST like he is!
    sorry for my poor language, i am a MALE from Israel.

  10. Bob says:

    Jenia, Little was not convicted for abuse, rape, fraud or breach of contract. He was convicted for making and distributing videos that some people don’t like. Do you think that’s right? And if so, do you think it would be okay to prosecute you and send you to prison because I don’t like what you wrote in your post?

  11. michael says:

    Jenia says,

    “if you watch any of his films you’ll definitely notice that max abuses the girls by any means he can, against their will.”

    If this were true he would have been charged with assault or rape, but he wasn’t. “Obscenity” is a purely political crime. Censorship is forbidden by the Consitution and contrary to American values. If you don’t like the man’s films, don’t watch them. Oh, you object to OTHER people watching them, do you? I’m afrraid that is a protected right, even for films which make you angry.

  12. EH says:

    Having watched some of Max’s films and read some columns about him, I’m fairly sure that he is a rapist. I don’t know if it’s the same in the US in the UK, but here it’s estimated that up to 95% of rapes go unreported which I expect is especially true in the porn industry. Ergo, michael, he can be a rapist without having been charged with assault or rape.

    Still, that’s a problem with rape law. He shouldn’t have been convicted for simply making and distributing the porn. I think it’s amazing how easily eroded the US constitution is (on this and so many other issues) given that it’s a written document which holds almost fetishistic power in the rhetoric of most Americans.

  13. bukkake joe says:

    Its a sad day for me finding out that poul litle is now in prisen.
    He is my mentor and i hope someone will takes over the exelent
    work he produced.
    U.S.A. stinks !!!!!

    bukkake joe, Denmark

  14. Concerned Citizen says:

    I have seen some parts of his movies. They are disturbing to me. I am not a prude but what that guy did is disgusting. Nobody seems to be arguing what he was actually convicted for, and that is obscenity and the distribution of obscene materials. It is a law that obscene materials are illegal even while there is a thriving adult industry here in America. What does that say about “Max Hardcore” films in particular? Evidently there is a line one can cross in the making of adult films.
    Freedom of expression is essential and a Constitutional Right. However, the government, via a jury by fair trial, found that the material in question was a detriment to America’s citizens; That the material in question was so obscene it is beyond merely offensive and poses a threat to the American people.
    I know many would disagree with the argument postulated above, but ultimately that is what was asserted and found plausible by a jury of Paul Little’s fellow citizens.
    Perhaps the line (obscenity laws) was not clear enough for the adult industry to use as a measuring stick for what is out-of-bounds. Perhaps it is, and I think it is, but Paul Little decided to “push-the-envelope” anyways.
    The real irony here, and a sad one I think, is that Paul Little will more than likely be subject to the same sexual brutality in prison that he inflicted on women while he was free. That, I feel, is as great a crime as what Paul Little committed. Where is the justice?
    The government itself should be held to the same standards that Paul Little was held to. I am certain that there are wardens and prison guards and many others, including your senator-types, etc., who should be convicted for turning a blind eye and perpetuating their own foul system. Hypocrisy is the ugliest of all human character flaws.
    Nevertheless, I applaud the justice system for working in this instance. If laws are to be upheld, there must be a conviction when they are broken. This conviction will no doubt resonate throughout the adult industry community setting a benchmark, further defining the line between what is acceptable treatment of women, and what is not, in depiction of abuse or abuse itself. Society has a right to govern itself – that is the American experiment.

  15. Jack says:


    I loved it. Please write more so informatial Posts about this theme….

  16. free people says:

    people ! you are sick !
    many of you write here, but did you see any of those films? porn doesn’t mean violence, sickness and humiliation

    what you can see in those movies is nothing more than humans acting like animals, maybe this is the direction we’re going…

%d bloggers like this: