A Novel Defense of Prostitution
“The accused Upper East Side madam says she should get a slide — because big companies promote prostitution all the time and are never prosecuted. By distributing adult films, corporations like DirecTV and Marriott essentially pay porn actors to have sex, no less so than a pimp or madam pays a prostitute to have sex with a john, the millionaire reasons. If those companies aren’t prosecuted, she says, neither should she be. The legal argument has been filed on behalf of Jenny Paulino, 44, arrested in December after a raid on her alleged American Beauties escort service and brothel at East 60th Street and Third Avenue. ‘Goliath corporations . . . conspicuously reap huge profits from the distribution of adult films with no penalty,’ defense lawyer Gerald Lefcourt argues in court papers. By prosecuting Paulino and not big companies, the DA is violating her constitutional guarantee of equal protection under the law, Lefcourt writes.” —New York Post (US)
It’s hard to deny that she’s got a good argument. If some people can get paid to have sex, why can’t others? The only real difference between two actors in a porn film and a hooker with her customer — aside from the fact that the porn stars are probably hotter — is the fact that, in the movie, both the fuckers are getting paid, whereas in the brothel the john is paying the hooker. But honestly, is that any real difference? In both scenarios, cash and body fluids are being exchanged.
No doubt the judges will end up discrediting Ms. Paulino’s line of reasoning somehow, since it’s hard to imagine a lone madam either (a) legalizing prostitution or (b) bringing down the whole porn business. But even if this argument fails to make the impact that it ought to, it does still point to a possible loophole. If brothels were to set up a video camera beside every bed, could they claim simply to be producing adult films? The johns could be considered producers or investors. They donate a few hundred bucks to finance the film, then — hey, since they happen to be there, why not? The johns can act in the film too, and the “brothel” can pay them four or five dollars for their performance, and then afterward the videotape can get lost, or they can discover that the camera wasn’t working, or maybe the john can take it home as a souvenir. That wouldn’t be illegal, would it? After all, it’s not prostitution. It’s business.
Ze size, it doesn’t always matter in court cases.
We wish her well.
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1122929108666
“New York Law Journal , 08-02-2005 – A Manhattan judge has enunciated the legal distinction between prostitution and paying someone to participate in sexual activity to make a pornographic film. Prostitution, as traditionally defined, requires person A paying person B for sexual activity to be performed on A, Supreme Court Justice Budd G. Goodman wrote in People v. Paulino, 6687/04. Pornography, on the other hand, involves person C paying B for sexual activity performed on A. “
Jenny took a plea bargain on Friday. Forfeiture of the $400,000 they seized, 1.5 million fine, 6 months at Riker’s Island and 5 years probation.
Look, I worked for a couple of agencies for a short while besides Jenny and she just happened to catch a bad break. Portfolioelite and Monalisa are essentially the same and hire many of the same girls but for whatever reason, nobody came after them. Mia and Annie have become much more more careful after Jenny was busted but nothing has changed. They still make tons of money and are always looking for new girls. And, they still get tons of new girls.
All comments become the property of PervScan. You must use an email address to post a comment. However, PervScan disallows email addresses in the text of comments.
Jailbait