Grady Judd, at it again, in America’s Wang

By Marc Randazza

Following a three-month-long investigation of Theresa and Warren Taylor – Theresa being better known as “Kimberly Kupps” – the Polk County sheriff arrested them both on charges of promotion and distribution of obscene material.  The crime?  Creating pornography in their own home, then selling it both on their paysite and the popular distribution site (Source.)

Sadly, this is par for the course in Polk County.  The same Polk County where Philip Greaves, then living in Colorado, was indicted on obscenity charges for writing a book concerning pedophilia.  Let’s not forget the 15-year-old who was suspended from using the bus for three days after he passed gas on it.  And then there was the antique store owner who was charged with obscenity production for taking nude photos of willing participants – even if, at first blush, child porn charges may have been more appropriate.  Maybe I have Polk County all wrong and this is all the doing of dedicated gestapo fuckhead Sheriff Grady Judd.  But then again, Polk County is home to all the drooling, meth-addled retards who keep electing him.

It would be comforting to write this off as another Judd-ism, write a blog post about it, and put the incident behind me.  I don’t even live in Florida anymore; to hell with the place.  This case, however, goes too far.  Consenting adults, in the sanctuary of their own home, filmed themselves having sex — and by all accounts, the content they produced was pretty vanilla (e.g. no fisting, no watersports, no extreme bondage or BDSM, etc.).  In addition, the couple wasn’t exactly rolling in dough from this venture: by available reports, their porn activities brought in $700 per month. (Source.)
Enough for a few nice meals, sure, but not enough to finance a credible criminal defense.

Never one to let common sense or the First Amendment to come between him and a camera, Judd went to the press shortly after these arrests. Fox 13 had the initial interview.

“We want a wholesome community here, we don’t want smut peddlers,” Judd said, “and if they try to peddle their smut from Polk County or into Polk County we’ll be on them like a cheap suit.”


“They should heed the warning: If you engage in creating or selling obscene materials we are going to lock you up, and we enjoy that,” he said.

The profundity and wisdom of Judd is matched only by Yoda himself.  The last time I checked – I’m only a First Amendment attorney – “smut” is not a prohibited form of speech, much less a recognized category of speech.  Child porn is not protected by the First Amendment.  Nor is obscenity.  Smut, whatever the hell it is defined as, is protected by the First Amendment, as is everything not falling within the child porn and obscenity exclusions.  I’ll refrain from picking the low hanging fruit pointing out the hilarious irony of a peckerwood inbred like Judd mocking a cheap suit.

To Judd, this is a big game. He “enjoy[s]” when he can “lock you up.”  He’s not going to let a few founding principles get in the way of getting his jollies.  After a perusal of my prior coverage of Polk County affairs, I realized I’d left something unsaid that I want to say right now.

Grady Judd: fuck you.

And to the people of Polk County who enable this kind of bullshit for decades on end, fuck you, too.

When I’m not blogging, I’m busy running a law firm, Randazza Legal Group.  You may have heard of it; I have the privilege of defending bloggers, decorated war veterans and porn companies from attacks on their free speech rights.  I do not represent Mrs. Taylor or her husband.  I will, however, be making a donation to their legal defense fund.

I encourage everyone else who values free speech to do the same.  Inability to pay should not be a barrier to justice, especially in a case like this where the fundamental right to free expression is at stake.  Making only $700 per month from their adult business operation, Judd probably just expects the Taylors to roll over and plead guilty – quickly.  They shouldn’t, and we shouldn’t let them.  I do not know if this will be the case, but it’s time for someone to end Grady Judd.  Not to beat him, to ruin him.  To bescumber his legacy and make his name forever synonymous with the worst, most oppressive kind of home-grown terrorism that he’s inflicted onto the people of Florida, deserving though they may be, for decades.  I want him to have a forced, miserable retirement, and his children to quickly – in hushed shame – change their last names when he dies, to forever bury the shameful association.  It is long past time for Judd to be forced into the outhouse where he spends most of his time secretly thumbing through a crusty Fredericks of Hollywood catalogue from 1977, panting while doing so, forever. (Proverbially! rhetorical hyberbole ftw.)

17 Responses to Grady Judd, at it again, in America’s Wang

  1. Clint says:

    You speak of harsh punishments, and yet you just argued someone should pay $60,000 for downloading a movie or two. Pot. Kettle. Black.

    • Scott Jacobs says:

      The major difference, Clint, is that theft of IP is a crime, while “smut” is actually protected by the Bill of Rights.

      • Zero says:

        1) It’s not theft, it’s Copyright Infringement.
        2) It’s not a crime, it’s a civil matter.

        • When you take something that you have no right to, it is theft.

          And, it is actually a crime. It just can be enforced criminally or civilly.

          Do your homework before whining here.

          • Zero says:

            I was speaking from the legal perspective, and I did do my homework.

            In the United States Supreme Court Case Dowling v United States (1985) the Supreme Court held that bootlegged phonorecords did not constitute stole property. They also held that “…interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The Copyright Act even employs a separate term of art to define one who misappropriates a copyright… ‘an infringer of the copyright.'” Thus, it is not, legally, theft. You may call it theft for moral reasons, but that is a different usage.

            Also currently, in the US, only copyright infringement on a “commercial scale” is considered to be criminal. Anything less than that is only a civil issue, not criminal. I did my homework, if you think I’m wrong, please prove it.

            • See 17 USCS § 506. There is nothing in the criminal section of the copyright act that requires the theft to be on a “commercial scale.” Mere “private financial gain” suffices.

              Now, question how broad that language is. Is it broad enough that it encompasses merely getting something for free? That might take some work to stretch it that far. Does it encompass someone posting it on Fileserve so that they can earn their referral fees — yes.

              As far as the semantics over “theft” vs. “infringement” goes — it is a childish debate at its core. Is it “theft” to embezzle money? No, you might have stolen the money, but it is embezzlement, not “theft.” So is it improper to say a guy is a thief if he embezzles money — yeah it is.

              Your Dowling case has no application here. Bootleg records might not be “stolen property,” but if you can’t see the logical distinction there, then you need to go to a more basic-level conversation and then return here. Your case does not support the proposition that infringement =/= theft. As idiotic as that debate is, I understand why the torrent-thief crowd loves to go down that road. “We’re not thieves, we’re infringers” does sound a little bit better. Nevertheless, “deliberate unlawful copying is no less an unlawful taking of property than garden-variety theft.” MGM Studios Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., 545 U.S. 913, 961 (U.S. 2005) (Breyer, J. concurring).

              This post, however, is about Grady Judd … not copyright infringement. Go whine about your right to steal elsewhere — you’ll find more receptive ears anywhere but here.

    • Actually, I argued that they should pay $50,000 per movie. And, it was for seeding the content – not merely downloading. Know your facts before whining around here.

      • Clint says:

        [sarcasm]Big difference there, buddy.[/sarcasm]

      • Zero says:

        $50,000 per movie is still disproportional to the action. Especially when as of yet, there is no proof that piracy actually causes net harm. In fact, there are several studies that despite the initial “common sense” view, piracy in the long run is a net benefit for most things that society has decided is “good”.

        The result is that what people see as good, and desire more of is still getting money and paid for. In most cases (not all) those who pirate the most content are also those who spend the most money on content. But that’s another story. The point is, until a movie studio can actually prove damages caused by piracy that doesn’t involve counting every individual download as a lost sale (because it’s not) and takes into account the extra publicity and extra sales that occur as a result of piracy, $50,000 per movie is just grossly out of proportion for the supposed injury. Just as you speak of harsh punishments here, no one deserves to have their life ruined just because they downloaded or seeded a movie.

        • as of yet, there is no proof that piracy actually causes net harm


          those who pirate the most content are also those who spend the most money on content.


          • Zero says:

            I was hoping to have some intelligent discussion here, especially due to the respect I have for the work you do for the First Amendment. In fact on most things I see on here I am in complete agreement with you and find you to be a highly intelligent individual. Thus I am disappointed that the entirety of your response is just “Lie” rather than any kind of discussion.

            If there is proof that piracy causes harm then by all means show it to me. Anecdotal evidence does not count and every report on the “harm” of piracy that has been published was funded by the entertainment industry and makes the same mistakes of equating every download with a lost sale and not taking into account the sales and income that is generated by increased exposure.

            Many Studies show that piracy can increase sales and pirates tend to spend more than non-pirates. In addition, even the GAO has stated In a report that the losses reported by piracy so far are unsubstantiated and stated that due to the fact that there is no quantifiable data that can be used, the effects of piracy are pretty much “unknown”.

            Thus, as I stated earlier, there is no actual proof that piracy causes harm (there is also no proof aside from surveys and studies and anecdotes that it has a net gain either.) If you disagree with me, feel free to cite something as I have done. I look forward to your response.

            • Step one in having an intelligent discussion is realizing when the discussion is appropriate. Just because Clint decided to start hijacking the post with his crybaby bullshit doesn’t mean that I have an obligation to indulge every torrent apologist fucktard that decides to blow in to town.

              You want to debate me on this? Go get your own blog and invite me to debate — or wait for a copyright / torrenting post and we can do it there.

              I have no obligation to engage you on any terms whatsoever. My blog. My rules. You don’t like it? Go read another blog.

            • Derek says:

              And this is why I love coming to this blog every day…

    • J DeVoy says:

      Holy hijack, Batman!

  2. Vicky Gallas says:

    Looks like Judd’s straw men posting here… Back to the topic:

    Greaves accepted some deal and took probation in the book case. I hope this couple doesn’t do the same. Please, anyone, post a website link for the Taylors if you come across one. They really need to publicize this case and put-up a PayPal donation button. They should post all documents from the case as it moves forward. It’s time to have half the world on Judd’s oppressive operation.

  3. […] we previously reported, Theresa Warren, a/k/a Kimberly Kupps, has been charged with several counts of producing obscenity in the backwoods of backward Polk County, Florida.  Kupps and her husband are represented pro […]

  4. […] also notes the recent arrest of Kimberly Kupps on numerous obscenity counts as a reason to avoid Florida. (You can donate to Kupps’ defense […]

%d bloggers like this: