Public Law 106.386
Sex trafficking contains all the elements of the crime of forcible rape when it involves force, fraud, or coercion.
Women who signed up to do porn were not Sex Trafficked (raped). This was a manufactured case by the FBI of San Diego. These are women who take no responsibility for their actions or bodies according to their civil depositions.
Background
This case began in 2015 as a civil lawsuit and lasted over four years. Michael Pratt was blocked from testifying in his own defense. Over 208 videos were released during this time, and the media falsely portrayed the women involved as victims of sex trafficking. This is not true. The women in the videos voluntarily participated, received payment, and were not coerced in any way.
Key Points
- No Sex Trafficking: The models were not trafficked or coerced. They signed contracts and were paid for their work.
- Model Payments: Models earned between $3,000 and $5,000 per video. Over 750 videos were produced, generating more than $20 million in revenue.
- Voluntary Participation: Models willingly participated and some even returned to film additional content.
Refuting False Allegations
- Substance Use: No drugs or alcohol were used during filming. The quality of the production made substance use impractical.
- "Blocked Doors" Myth: Allegations about blocked doors are baseless with no supporting evidence.
- Deceptive Modeling Claims: Models had agreed to participate in adult films, as shown by emails and photos sent prior to travel.
- Flight Threats: No flights were ever canceled. This is another false accusation.
- Repeated Participants: Some women who claim to be victims participated in multiple videos, including scenes with many others.
- Porn WikiLeaks Incident: Michael Pratt paid $20,000 to protect models' privacy by removing their names from the website.
The Bigger Picture
This case is part of a politically motivated attack on the adult entertainment industry. The U.S. is the only country where civil cases can become criminal cases, which complicates the legal process for businesses like *GirlsDoPorn*.
Conclusion
The case against Michael Pratt and *GirlsDoPorn* is not about sex trafficking or exploitation. It's an attempt to damage the reputation of a legitimate business. The real question is why false claims of rape are allowed to go unchallenged in a court of law.
Follow me on X