Woman escapes porn-watching burglar

He broke in, watched porn, cut cords on appliances, placed knives throughout the house and waited for her to come home.

| Sara Shepherd

Stillbirth photo considered pornography in South Africa

An editor sent officials photos of a mother giving birth to a stillborn baby. She did it to make a statement about how nursing strikes were hurting people. She's now facing pornography charges.

An interesting story about tradition, free press and varying worldwide definitions of decency.

|Meredith Rodriguez

Porn under the pier?

Police arrested everyone in an eight-student film crew after they were caught taping a sex act under a pier in Myrtle Beach.

No passers-by (including the 12-year-old boy walking by on the beach) or police actually saw nudity. But all the students were charged with "participation in preparation of obscene material" --and police seized their script, scene board and video camera.

| Sara Shepherd

Breastfeeders marching to protest Facebook ban

The number of moms rallying against Facebook's ban of breastfeeding photos (specifically, Facebook says the areola, the dark skin around the nipple, violates a policy on "obscene, pornographic or sexually explicit" material) continues to grow.

Only a handful turned out Saturday "to sing, chant and breast-feed in front of Facebook's downtown Palo Alto headquarters," but thousands more are protesting electronically.

| Sara Shepherd

Blue Christmas

With help from local businesses, KCK police are getting holiday gifts for 88 kids from 26 families this year, as part of its community policing program. (BTW, if your department is doing something similar, please write in!)

Parents sue school over daughter's naked pic

In Washington, a high school cheerleader's parents are suing her school over a nude photo of her. They don't like the way the school handled the situation after the picture got texted to the entire football team.

| Sara Shepherd

Don't call the number on your new duck stamps!

Instead of the correct number for ordering --- 1-800-782-6724--- a misprint directs callers to          1-800-872-6724       .

Indeed, there's a difference between 1-800-STAMP24 --- and 1-800-TRAMP24.

|Sara Shepherd

Appeals court calls anti-porn law unconstitutional

In Ohio, a federal appeals court has ruled the Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act is unconstitutional, ABC News reports.

The law requires Internet porn sites to keep records on all its "subjects" for five years and make them available for government inspection. The goal is to keep underage performers out of the porn industry.

The court says this is chilling to free speech because it scares amateurs away from posting naked pictures of themselves on the Internet. (Though if the whole "being naked on the Internet" thing doesn't scare them, I'm not sure what else would.) Maintaining the records is burdensome to regular people who just want to pose nasty images of themselves online and aren't running online porn companies, one judge said.

Utah authorities say wrong number might be a crime

Unusual case from Utah, where a guy was trying to forward a porn clip from his cell phone to a friend's ... only he misdialed the number. A woman received it and filed a report with police. Prosecutors are weighing whether they should charge the guy with distribution of pornography.

More on JoCo obscenity cases

UPDATED: Local blogger Just Cara gives some kudos to the DA's office for dropping one of the obscenity cases ... but hopes one of the businesses goes to trial over this.

PREVIOUSLY: The obscenity charge has been dropped against Spirit Halloween, which moved a few racy costumes to a different part of the store, where little people couldn't see them.

Two other businesses, though, have pleaded not guilty and look like they're going to fight the charges. Hollywood At Home, accused of selling dirty movies, says it'll use a First Amendment defense. Snip from Diane Carroll's article:

(Defense Attorney Richard) Bryant has said that no one from Hollywood at Home was allowed to address the grand jury either.

As soon as the grand jury was convened, Bryant said, the store’s owners invited police to walk through the store to make sure they were in compliance with the law.

However, no officers ever took up the offer, made before any indictments were issued, he said.

Grand juries are not required to hear both sides of a case.

A different take on the JoCo obscenity case

This one's from local blogger emawkc at Three O'Clock In The Morning. Sarcasm filters in 3, 2 ...

But let me connect the dots for you anyway. With Halloween approaching and the economy in somewhat of a downturn, what better way to get publicity for your store than a controversial indictment?

According to my many inside sources, a secret cabal of Johnson County businessmen and political leaders hatched the scheme months ago. Using key sleeper agents planted at the National Coalition for the Protection of Children and Families, the group was able to time the release of these indictments to coincide with a time when interest would already be high.

The group reasoned that an announcement that the stores are selling items that are too raunchy for public view would be sure to bring the depraved Missouri shoppers to Johnson County to spend their money.

More on JoCo obscenity indictments

The obscenity indictments in Johnson County have generated a little attention in the blogosphere. Legal Satyricon, Kelly Garbato, Movies (And Other Necessities), all weighed in. The case also got some interest from a few adult-oriented sites, which I would link to, were it not for the horrific beating my editor Bill would give me.

JoCo grand jury issues obscenity indictments

UPDATED: Brian, the DA's spokesman, wrote back with a couple of notes. One, the grand jury was initiated by a petition drive, and grand juries get to decide what they're presented with. There are 15 citizens on a grand jury -- 12 of them have to agree before an indictment is issued.

He also points out the statutes that apply in this case. To see, go to http://www.kslegislature.org/legsrv-statutes/index.do, and look for 21-4502 and 21-4301.

UPDATED: OK, we've got the indictments, courtesy of Diane Carroll, who covers Johnson County courts. They're downloadable as Word documents. They might have language you consider objectionable.

Spirit Halloween -- accused of selling "Country Lovin'", "Tricky Dick," "Wet T-Shirt" and "Snake Charmer" costumes. (Don't exactly know what they look like.)
Priscilla's -- accused of selling a series of sex toys, including a dildo, and a DVD with a title that my editor would kill me if I printed.
Hollywood at Home -- accused of selling adult DVDs.

PREVIOUSLY: A JoCo grand jury has indicted three businesses on charges of promoting obscenity. You know, I'm a little surprised it's gotten to this point. The grand jury's done a lot of work, but it seems like they talked everything BUT obscenity, until now.

Johnson County does have a clearly spelled-out list of what is and isn't considered a breach of community standards, though, as established by a grand jury in 1989. Selling a porno movie that lacks a "significant storyline or plot" is a no-no under those rules. But I'm not sure how closely this grand jury consulted the old report.

Again, I don't know any of these businesses -- or what they're accused of selling. Maybe it's something truly obscene. I'm curious to see what specifically the grand jury reviewed. A little help, gentle reader: Does anybody have any experience with these stores?

From Sara Shepherd's story:

A grand jury has accused three Johnson County businesses of promoting obscenity, according to indictments handed down late Tuesday. ... Each of the three businesses was indicted on multiple counts, all misdemeanors.

According to court documents:

• Spirit Halloween, 6824 W. 119th St. in Overland Park, displayed adult costumes where minors could view them.

• Hollywood at Home, 9063 Metcalf Avenue in Overland Park, “unlawfully and knowingly or recklessly” possessed and intended to sell obscene DVDs.

• Priscilla’s, 1848 East Santa Fe St. in Olathe, possessed and intended to sell various obscene devices and an obscene DVD.

War On Porn: Judge won't dismiss Wichita charges

In Wichita, a gaggle of adult businesses are facing misdemeanor charges because they allegedly sold obscene materials. Their lawyers went to court yesterday, trying to get the cases kicked, but the judge says, no, a jury will decide what's obscene in Wichita. The charges are the result of two grand-jury reviews in 2005 and 2006, which were convened after an anti-porn group petitioned for an investigation.

CA man: The po-po won't give me back my porn

A California man who secretly videotaped a woman and a teenage girl is now suing the local police because they won't give him back his porn collection, the AP reports. The man's trove of filth includes about 500 movies and 250 magazines. The movies are worth approximately $10,000, his lawyer estimates. He says there's nothing illegal in the collection, and he's already served his time in the case.

Got HIV? Then you can't run an adult business in Swansea, IL

This is different ... In Swansea, Ill., the city government has passed a new law cracking down on adult-entertainment businesses. To get a business license, the applicants must prove they don't have HIV or any social diseases, provide a 10-year history of their mental health and obtain letters of recommendation from local residents.

As you can probably imagine, the adult-entertainment industry says this won't pass the constitutional smell test.

Miami tries to shut down home-based business

In this case, the business is an Internet porn site where men have sex with each other. I guess there were a lot of angry murmurs at the code enforcement office.

Kiddie-porn convict skips sentencing -- judge takes offense

A St. Clair, Mo., man skipped his sentencing on kiddie-porn charges back in March, so the judge decided to give him six years, six months -- not quite double what he could've gotten if he'd just shown up. Instead, he was on a bus to Florida, using a false identity. And yes, he was eventually caught.

War On Porn: A history lesson

Johnson County recently seated a grand jury to look at possible obscenity cases, but as the DA office notes, this isn't the first time something like this has come up. In 1989, a grand jury was seated for a similar purpose.

Brian, Phill Kline's spokesman, sent along a PDF of the 1989 grand jury's report. They didn't indict anybody, but they did set up community standards. It's an interesting read. Some of the jury's choices are no-brainers: videos depicting underage sex is obviously a no-no. But they also objected to "sexually oriented films lacking significant storyline or plot."

I talked to AG Paul Morrison, who was JoCo's DA at the time. He said he used the guidelines a lot and sent out investigators. He remembers prosecuting at least one case where a store rented an explicit movie to a teenager, another one of the grand jury's guidelines. In a lot of cases, Morrison said, his office would put stores "on notice," telling them about a complaint regarding a specific video. In most cases, businesses got into compliance without any case going to court.

War On Porn: Ottawa cracks the whip

Ottawa is rewriting its city codes to make it harder for adult businesses to move into the community. (The section of their ordinances dealing with this? Article X.)

Grand juries to form for pornography investigation

Johnson and Wyandotte counties are going to start assembling grand juries to see whether local businesses -- adult bookstores and video shops, primarily -- are promoting obscenity. The National Coalition for the Protection of Children & Families is pushing prosecutors on both sides of the state line to start investigations.

Laura Bauer's got a good story about the process so far. There's a good chance whoever lands on these juries will be asked to watch dirty movies and visit some adult bookstores.

Kansans nominate ex-porn dealer

The former mayor of Marysville, Kansas, has won a primary election contest for that office despite having served two prison sentences for selling/possessing pornography in the past.

Hat tip to reader kmb!

Does Internet pornography reduce rape?

A 56-page paper presented at Stanford Law school by a Clemson University economics professor last month argues it does. Slate reports it as How the Internet Prevents Rape.

Professor Todd Kendall isn't advocating use of porn -- he's just saying its easy access online has provided a "substitute" for aggression leading to sexual assault (although not for other violent crimes).

Hat tip to reader Joshua G.!

Judge faces sentence in exposure case

Reader Jen links to a 2005 story about this case, and asks for an update. Very timely! From Friday:

Former judge faces sentencing
SAPULPA, Okla. (AP) - Former Creek County judge Donald D. Thompson was released on $75,000 bond following his conviction on four felony counts of indecent exposure while presiding over trials in 2002 and 2003.
Three courthouse employees testified to seeing the judge's penis exposed while he presided over trials. Prosecutors also contended that Thompson used a device called a "penis pump" while presiding.
The jury recommended one year imprisonment and a $10,000 fine for each count.
The former judge still faces a charge of misusing state property, for four lewd images found on a computer in his office. The misdemeanor count was separated from the trial after a material witness eluded police on the eve of opening arguments.

Prairie porn

   Anti-porn activists are rejuvenated now that a federal judge in Kansas has dismissed a lawsuit against an ordinance regulating a sex shop in Dickinson County. The Lion's Den Adult Superstore had filed the lawsuit, hoping to get the ordinance declared unconstitutional.
   A jubilant Phillip Cosby of Abilene told The Associated Press that his efforts to throw up roadblocks for the porn industry would continue.
   "If I could throw a kitchen sink, I would," he said.

Read AP story: federal_judge_dismisses_lawsuit_against_sex.doc