Joe Francis, Child Abuser

The bad news is that serial woman-abuser and exploitation profiteer Joe Francis is out of jail. The good news is that he is now a convicted child abuser, having pleaded no contest to a charge of felony child abuse, and a misdemeanor prostitution charge.

I think it is incumbent on all of us to say a hearty “Ha Ha! Joe Francis is a child abuser!”

What I have not seen is any discussion of whether this will require him to register as a sex offender, though I expect he will not because the top count was an abuse charge rather than a sexual assault charge. I do not know Florida law on this; I will update if anyone has specific information.


Similar Posts (automatically generated):

28 comments for “Joe Francis, Child Abuser

  1. Chris
    March 13, 2008 at 4:22 pm

    It’s a screwed up legal system that only makes you register as a sex offender if it was on the top of the list of things you were convicted of.

  2. Blendy
    March 13, 2008 at 5:31 pm

    But the real question is whether or not the judge gave him a t-shirt after banging the gavel?

  3. preying mantis
    March 13, 2008 at 5:38 pm

    They seem to make you register at the drop of a hat in this state. I imagine that since the abuse was of a sexual nature, he’ll need to. If his residence isn’t in Florida, I’m not sure how that would play out across state lines, though.

  4. March 13, 2008 at 6:02 pm

    I thought it was because the lasses lied about their age and he has no defense (Tracy Lords). If they were 18, he’d be free.

    Funny, they all appeared to be active and consensual participants in the production. Isn’t that the opposite of slut-shaming? Or is this too much Schadenfreude?

  5. Thomas
    March 13, 2008 at 6:25 pm

    Mold, have you ever heard any accounts of how those GGW events go? Women are told the sign a huge release with a lot of fine print, but if they ask to read it the producers pull the clipboard away. They get inside the venues, usually bars, and get drinks almost literally shoved down their throats, and then rowdy, liquored-up gangs of men crowd around, chanting and jumping and shouting for them to take their clothes off and make out with other women. It’s as coercive an environment as they can make it. The women get nothing but a tee-shirt.

    Also, if you followed the links, you would have learned that Francis assaulted and threatened a reporter who covered him, generally speaks about women with contempt, and sexually assaulted a drunk woman (minor, IIRC) who he took onto the GGW tour-bus.

    Are you just ignorant of the background, or did you really make an informed decision to go out on a limb and defend Joe Francis?

    BTW, if you want to see underaged girls topless, there are places like Europe and Brazil. You can go there and stare at teenager’s breasts without worrying that they were too drunk to know what they were doing, or that they were afraid the rowdy crowd of drunk men would harm them if they refused. But then, it’s considered gauche to masturbate to underaged girls on the beach, and criminal in most places. GGW videos, however, you can use in your own home, which explains your defense of Joe Francis.

  6. Hector B.
    March 13, 2008 at 6:39 pm

    Mr. Francis, 34, said he pleaded guilty “just to get out of jail.”

    Where have I heard that before? Oh, yeah: Larry Craig, I’d like you to meet Joe Francis; Joe Francis, meet Larry Craig.

  7. Bitter Scribe
    March 13, 2008 at 6:51 pm

    Give Joe Francis credit. He invented a new way to exploit women sexually, and almost got away with it. Too bad (for him) the law caught up with him. It didn’t help that he was openly contemptuous (in both senses of the word) of the legal system, and an obnoxious asshole in general.

    Didn’t he used to go out with Paris Hilton? Talk about a match made in heaven…

  8. Sniper
    March 13, 2008 at 7:48 pm

    Also, if you followed the links, you would have learned that Francis assaulted and threatened a reporter who covered him, generally speaks about women with contempt, and sexually assaulted a drunk woman (minor, IIRC) who he took onto the GGW tour-bus.

    Like Mold gives a shit.

  9. March 13, 2008 at 8:19 pm

    Thanks for reminding me about the reporter (was it Judy “Transcriptionist” Miller?). Seriously, he likely deserved time for that as he strikes me as an @sshat.
    Gosharooties, women who drink might be considered fair game by sickos. But being free, white, and over 21 means that nothing bad will happen. It’s the magic of Entitlement.
    So, if the women told him to hike, they’d be left alone? Since most, if not all, were of majority ageit follows that they made bad decisions and now have tacky videos to prove it.
    Since the charges are somewhat lesser, I must assume the drunk minor held herself to be an adult and only later cried at trial while wearing pigtails and a far more demure choice of dress.
    Thomas, if you thought about it for a minute, you’d realize that the whole point to the vids was masturbation. The ad times, the choice of material, and the simpleness of the business plan are classic p0rn.
    Do I think JF is a jerk and sleazy? Oh yes. Do I think he was railroaded? Perhaps. Could be he forgot to donate to the local pols.
    Hate to tell you this but if there was anything more, JF would be playing tag with another inmate. For real and for time.

  10. james
    March 13, 2008 at 9:18 pm

    Couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy.

    Still I can’t help but think there’s something wrong. There’s something deeply screwed about a situation where someone in jail awaiting trial pleads guilty, and then immediately gets released on account of having already served his time. It’s an obvious attempt to fuck whoever they’re going after, rather anything to do with justice.

  11. Sniper
    March 13, 2008 at 9:26 pm

    Yes, we all know how much you care about female children and feminism, Mold. After all, here’s your defence of a legislator who called teenaged parents “sluts”.

    I am over 16. So is the legislator. Both of us have spent our formative years where expelling preggers was normal and accepted. If I feel odd, imagine what he feels. I did get to see pregnant girls graduating. He probably never did.

  12. March 13, 2008 at 10:24 pm

    Sniper,
    The point is that our experiences define us. Those past 16 remember when the norm was to expel preggers. Mayhaps in your experience it was the odd thing NOT to be preggers for graduation. If so, you’d find it odd that girls waited to have offspring. Given the inverse relationship between education and teener pregnancy, it might be that women going on to college is a foreign concept.

    Anyway, I vaguely recall the charges and was glad I didn’t have to prosecute such a weak case. It seemed more to mess with the guy than any true need for justice.

  13. March 13, 2008 at 11:25 pm

    Methinks teener, pregger Molders needs to be banneders for stupiders, bullshitters, faux liberal commenters.

  14. March 14, 2008 at 12:45 am

    Lauren,
    you are funny.

    Mold,
    if you just go and read the LA Times reporter’s initial story, you’ll have a good understanding of why i am about to say, what i, well, am about to say:

    you’re a sexist fuckwit.

  15. March 14, 2008 at 1:14 am

    i seconder laurener

  16. March 14, 2008 at 2:58 am

    Awww, did my lack of deference dismay you? Sorry not. It was standard practice to send preggers out of school. Standard. Normal. Everyday. Wishing does nothing to rescind history.
    Oh, it was much cheaper, for the district. Preggers raise the per pupil to at least double. Externalities being what they will, look for a return to this when districts are really strapped for cash.

  17. March 14, 2008 at 6:37 am

    it would be great if some of the young women launched civil suits against him and got his money. that’s what it’s all about, if he was broke no one would have any use for him.
    any creative lawyer ideas?

  18. Roxie
    March 14, 2008 at 6:40 am

    finalfuckingly

  19. preying mantis
    March 14, 2008 at 7:25 am

    “Still I can’t help but think there’s something wrong. There’s something deeply screwed about a situation where someone in jail awaiting trial pleads guilty, and then immediately gets released on account of having already served his time.”

    If I remember correctly, he was in jail on account of contempt of court, not refusal to grant bond. And yes, it is entirely possible for you to sit in jail on account of contempt of court for much, much longer than you would have on the original charge, especially if it’s a crime for which not much time is given and said time is typically reduced or suspended in favor of probation, community service, restitution, etc. It’s just that most people don’t wind up in that situation because they’re not somehow convinced that the court system won’t enforce its rules.

  20. Sniper
    March 14, 2008 at 10:25 am

    Sorry not. It was standard practice to send preggers out of school. Standard. Normal. Everyday. Wishing does nothing to rescind history.

    So you say. I am well into middle age, perhaps older than you,, but I went to high school in a country where the government had an obligation to educate all children, even the evil ones who had sex. Even the really, really, cherry-on-top evil ones who got pregnant. Oh, sorry. “Preggers”.

    Jesus.

  21. March 14, 2008 at 10:36 am

    I think I have a new least favorite word, up there with “multitasking” and “Quiverfull”.

  22. Roy
    March 14, 2008 at 10:40 am

    For the record, didn’t he plead “No Contest” to the charges? Which isn’t, I believe, quite the same as pleading guilty.

    Oh, it was much cheaper, for the district. Preggers raise the per pupil to at least double.

    How, exactly, is it more expensive to educate a pregnant teen than a not pregnant teen? I’m pretty sure that they don’t supply books, lockers, or materials to the fetus, so I’m not sure where the doubled cost would come from. And, really… those past 16 remember that time? Because I’m just shy of 30, and I haven’t heard of anyone being “sent away” for being pregnant since at least my parent’s generation. Are you really suggesting that it was common practice to ship off pregnant girls all the way into the late 90s?

  23. March 14, 2008 at 11:06 am

    Congratulations, Mold, you have officially de-railed your last thread here. Bye bye now.

  24. March 15, 2008 at 10:12 pm

    Mold likely is just wishful that he had Francis’ money and opportunity.

    The thing that really struck me about Francis is that his sense of entitlement is so huge that he thinks that he can assault women because he just feels like it, (the assault on the reporter is just one example that got documented), feels he can tell a sitting judge to f*ck-off, and *still* doesn’t see that, even though he broke the law, and clearly *recognizes* that he broke the law, his reaction is still “so what? Only little people pay taxes”

    Just where was he when they called the line to hand out common sense? Hiding out in the men’s room wanking off?

  25. April 27, 2008 at 6:39 pm

    Regarding your 2005 Zubulake comments (closed to comment) and response by John Dortmunder:

    Mr. Dortmunder claims he worked directly with me– I don’t recall his name. How could he comment on me?

    He infers that I allegedly sued others . That’s news to me.

    He seems to know what happened to me. He doesn’t.

    Conclusion: Don’t believe everything in writing. The jury heard the facts and adjudicated.

  26. Ismone
    April 28, 2008 at 11:52 am

    Laura–

    The funny thing was, the jackass commenter accused your supervisor of making sexual innuendos, hitting on women, and making sexual jokes. More so then he did to men. That would be sexual harassment. I THOUGHT he was a lying dumbass, good to know for sure.

    And congratulations.

    Ismone, long-time reader

Comments are closed.