See other Pious Perverts Articles
Title: Judge Gone Wild!
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.usatoday.com/life/people ... -francis-arrested_N.htm?csp=34
Published: Apr 11, 2007
Author: Associated Press
Post Date: 2007-04-11 06:59:53 by Paul Revere
Keywords: None
Views: 831
Comments: 50
PENSACOLA, Fla. (AP) — The founder of the Girls Gone Wild video empire was taken into custody by federal marshals early Tuesday to face a contempt of court citation after initially defying a federal judge. Joe Francis was booked into the Bay County Jail in Panama City, said Ruth Sasser, a spokeswoman for the sheriff's office. "His attorneys continue to work toward a settlement," Ronn Torossian, a Francis spokesman, said in a statement e-mailed to The Associated Press. Francis, 34, makes an estimated $29 million a year from videos of young women exposing their breasts and in other sexually provocative situations. He appeared Tuesday afternoon before federal Magistrate Larry A. Bodiford, who ordered him held without bail. Torossian said Francis would likely be held until at least Thursday, when he is scheduled to appear before U.S. District Judge Richard Smoak, the judge who issued the contempt citation. He drew the contempt citation during negotiations in a civil lawsuit brought by seven women who were underage when they were filmed by his company on Panama City Beach during spring break in 2003. My comments: A federal judge in a civil case in Florida ordered Girls Gone Wild owner Joe Francis held in jail for contempt for his refusal to settle the civil case. Are you kidding me?! A federal judge who orders a party to settle or face contempt charges? It is common for federal judges to put pressure on litigants to settle cases, especially cases the judge doesn't want to try. But the only duty a party has vis-a-vis settlement is to make a good faith effort. If a party doesn't want to settle, the remedy is TRIAL, not contempt for refusing to settle. This is yet another judge gone wild, a man who thinks he is the law.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-10) not displayed.
.
.
.
#11. To: Diana (#9)
Meanwhile here in Eugene I chatted with a couple of topless women on the right bank bike path along the Willamette River yesterday. It was a warm day and as the season gets longer more women will doff their shirts and blouses in a perfectly legal way here. It doesn't raise many eyebrows here, unless you just moved here and are unfamiliar with local laws, or you hate this sort of display of secondary sexual characteristics in the first place.
I think you missed some of the story...it was below an ad or something... Here's the rest of the story from the same link: Lawyers for the women told Smoak that Francis became enraged during the settlement talks, shouting obscenities at the lawyers and threatening to "bury them." Smoak ordered Francis to settle the case or go to jail for his behavior. Negotiations continued with the help of a mediator, but broke down Thursday, and Smoak issued a contempt of court warrant. Francis initially refused to surrender and called Smoak "a judge gone wild." The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta refused to let him remain free pending an appeal. Jan Handzlik, Francis' Los Angeles-based attorney, said the court is considering another appeal. "If someone behaves badly in a civil case, you punish them with a monetary sanction. It is alien to the justice system to say to a person who is not willing to settle a civil case that they should go to jail. You take the case to trial," Handzlik said. Torossian told the AP that Francis "surrendered on his own 100%." But U.S. Marshals spokesman Dominic Guadagnoli said marshals were monitoring the airport and were tipped to Francis' arrival. "We were not aware that he would be flying in in the morning. He stepped off the jet, and he was immediately arrested," he said. "If he was coming to Panama City to turn himself in, he was a day late and a dollar short." Francis had said Thursday he would settle the case to avoid jail time. "I'll give up a billion dollars, but it will be under duress," he said, arguing that any money given would be voided in an appeal.
I don't need to contact the court or the source. I can read. Here's the story: http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2007-04-10-francis-arrested_N.htm? csp=34 Lawyers for the women told Smoak that Francis became enraged during the settlement talks, shouting obscenities at the lawyers and threatening to "bury them." Smoak ordered Francis to settle the case or go to jail for his behavior.
I'm not the person confused. You are. Have you ever tried a federal court case? Have you ever even been in a federal court? Do you have any idea what a suit for damages is? Do you have any idea what the standard of conduct is for federal judges? Get a law degree, pass the bar, practice until you're skilled, get licensed to try cases before federal judges, try such cases and win them, and THEN get back to me with your explanation for what is happening in the court. You're misinformed, but like many who are misinformed, you trudge on, confident in your own ignorance.
For cryin out loud, get a grip on yourself......not there, silly boy. Get hold of your emotions. :) EDIT: I'm trying to make some sense out of what you posted. What you were squalling about was not what the article said......what part of the article you provided for us to read. Capiche? That was where the difficulty was--trying to figure out where you were coming from based on what you gave us.
I don't see what is confusing. You challenged me regarding what I had reported, and failed to accurately state what and why the court had ruled. This is a judge out of control. That's the point. Not girls showing their tatas, not exploitive and disgusting young entrepreneurs. This is about MONEY. This is about a judge helping one side in civil lawsuit, instead of being a judge. Here's how this should have been handled: The plaintiffs file a motion to compel GGW to attend a mediation in good faith, and they file a motion for sanctions to cover their costs of the lost settlement session, as well as the costs associated with the motion. The judge grants the motions, orders GGW to pay sanctions in the form of cash, paid immediately to the attorneys for the plaintiffs. The amount of the sanction is reasonable, and is based upon the actual costs associated with the delays and costs occasioned by the bad conduct of the GGW guy at the last session. The court can hold someone in contempt, but it is simply unheard of to hold someone in contempt and jail them until they settle. My best guess is the judge is helping someone on the plaintiff's team of lawyers.
The point is....he was NOT held in contempt for not settling; rather it was for his outrageous behaviour during sessions to settle the case. That was what was puzzling to me......you were yelling that it was because he refused to settle. How can you be forced to settle........that's like being forced to recall something. And so, in looking at the USA link trying to find other stories about this case I saw that there was more to the article than you posted. So I read the damned thing--and ta da! There it is....the bastard acted like a total asshole with/to/against 'officers of the court' with his threats and language, in which case I reckon it would be akin to saying it to the judge's face or some other such crap. On that note, I'm done......continue ranting if it makes you happy. Have a good evening on the board.
You are wrong. He was held in contempt for refusing to settle. If you have an order from the court that says otherwise, let's see it. He was held in contempt for his conduct, but the penalty of incarceration was specifically to require his compliance with the judge's order to settle. The only thing the GGW owner can do to get out is settle, and that is not right. A Court can find you in contempt and jail you until you agree to cure your contempt. It cannot order you to settle, however. This judge is a bad judge, probably a crooked judge. He did something outrageous and he should be removed from his position. But he won't be because our federal court system is a corruption, thanks to the appointments of Reagan, Bush and Bush. This particular judge has been on the bench barely a year, and he's a Bush appointment. He's a guy with a weak law background, from a mediocre law school. He's a Bush loyalist, and he's probably helping a friend or former business associate in this case.
That's how it was in Europe, many women took off their tops at the beach, and they had commercials on tv for soaps and other products where they'd show topless women, but it was never in a lacivious or sexual type of content, it was presented as natural and normal, sort of like breast-feeding, which is also not frowned upon in Europe, while some in this country freak out over breast- feeding in public. It all has to do with context and culture, personally I don't think naked breasts are a big deal, but in most parts of this country they are seen as purely sexual, and of course in GGW it's not presented as wholesome or natural but titallating (no pun intended!) and slutty.
When I see it here I sometimes muse about the big stink a sight like that produces in sexually anal retentive America. I absolutely adore the physical form off women, but one should not get hung up on breasts nor just the body. Without a woman's mind along with it, you get far less then half the package when you know a woman.
You are wrong. He was held in contempt for refusing to settle. If you have an order from the court that says otherwise, let's see it. He was held in contempt for his conduct, but the penalty of incarceration was specifically to require his compliance with the judge's order to settle. The only thing the GGW owner can do to get out is settle, and that is not right. A Court can find you in contempt and jail you until you agree to cure your contempt. It cannot order you to settle, however. EDIT: I forgot to comment cause I'm laughing too hard. *grin* I was thinking only to say, 'and he thinks I'm confused'........ Sorry......I really hadn't meant to comment further, but this was just too rich to not respond. IIRC, the USA story included something about mediating/negotiating a settlement in good faith--I do believe that means to put forth a genuine effort to come to terms of some sort. That doesn't mean to call them anything but white nor make threats of harm. Were you the whining lawyer? I have no doubt there are bad judges, but I guarantee there are a lot more bad lawyers! Just because one doesn't like-- but then, I suggest you get over it. If the judge is doing wrong, take it to a higher court. In this case where the defendant is alleged to have made millions, lots of millions, so bumping it up to a higher court should be no problem.
I see you're still struggling to understand the article and the case. Don't worry about it. I probably don't understand your field of expertise very well, either. Assuming you have one.
I read on Daily Kos that Joe Francis is being prosecuted in Nevada by a prosecutor involved in the U.S. Attorneys scandal.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
going topless is legal there? no wonder you like Eugene!
Re-read my post, son.
isn't that the truth? i've been to one nude beach--black's in La Jolla. we took a several mile walk to check it out (my friends and i were clothed). oh my, the bodies and the freaks. there was not a pretty sight (male or female) in sight. :P
Don't call me son, dipshit.
Never was there a more perfect time to say, "Fuck you and the horse you rode in on".......sonny!
I'm not surprised. He's a target by the people who want to make sin a crime.
I'm not surprised you want to have sex with a horse, but I'm off limits to queers. Try that BAC guy. I understand he goes your way.
it doesn't matter how he behaved. the judge was abusing his power in this civil case.
Francis, 34, makes an estimated $29 million a year from videos of young women exposing their breasts and in other sexually provocative situations. In a world where sin is rewarded and do-gooders are punished how can one hope to see justice? Trust in God, and you will see eternal justice.
God is always good! You think using the legal system to punish this kind of sin would be justice?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
it doesn't matter how he behaved. the judge was abusing his power in this civil case. Thank you. The issue before the court is irrelevant to the concept of judicial restraint. Judges are like umpires. Their job is call balls and strikes. They can't jump out there and tell the coach of one team to WALK the next batter. They call balls and strikes, and the teams have to be able to rely on consistency, which is the bedrock of strictly construing the law. I am appalled at the actions of the judge in the GGW case, because it's nothing less than locking up the owner of a large company to force him to pay money to plaintiffs who probably don't have that great a case. Can you imagine if a judge did that to Halliburton? He would be facing impeachment. That ridiculous clown in Florida probate court - Larry Seidlin - set a new standard for judicial audacity, but this rookie federal judge is much more dangerous. The bar should be up in arms about this, but given the defendant, the bar will say diddly squat.
Here is a picture of the pimp that makes 29 million a YEAR filming girls with their tops off. How many of these girls ever see a check? My bet is very few. The Judge has a right to be pissed off at this low-life. God is always good! He was sent to jail for his behavior during the civil trial you nit-wit. This has nothing to do with a settlement. Yes, the Judge gave him a way out of going to jail by settling, he didn't have to do that, he was being kind to the a-hole pimp. Is it so hard for you to see kindness on the part of this Judge? He did nothing wrong at all and I applaud him for his decision. This punk was threatening these girls lawyers with being "burried", that is a pretty bad threat and I don't think many Judges would put up with that crap in their court rooms.
God is always good! No, you nitwit, you're wrong. It wasn't a trial. It was a mediation. Ever been to one? Ever conducted one? Do you know anything at all relevant to this topic? You're a perfect example of the illogic that consumes many people when they try to look at a case. The judge has a role, and that role is not to decide pretrial that GGW should pay a settlement. You are end oriented, like most idiots who don't have the slightest notion how a case is developed, tried, or judged.
You just have your religious panties in a bunch because Joe Francis never video taped you with your top off.
What did Francis actually do? I doubt it was something as vague as refusing to settle. He must have done something more to get this judge so pissed off. Then he evidently failed to appear. As for the girls getting paid, they don't. He just shows up at spring break parties and they fight to get on film. Really, really stupid.
Here's another picture of your girl friend you are defending over an honorable Judge doing the right thing under the law. Yeah, it is pretty obvious what kind of "industry" you work in. God is always good! The industry I work in is the legal industry. I try cases. I'd strike you from the jury panel for cause.
Apparently the Court of Appeals didn't have a problem with the judge's ruling on contempt when they wouldn't allow him to be free on bail.
What happened is very simple. Every federal civil case has a court ordered mediation. The parties are ordered to attend the mediation and to attempt to settle in good faith. When one party in the mediation says "that's it, forget it, I'm not settling, screw you, let's try the case," and storms out, the other party or parties may ask the court to impose sanctions. Typically, the sanction is monetary, and the dollar figure is compensatory of the additional costs for having the hearing on the motions and reconvening the mediation. For example, in this case, the proper remedy would be for the court to issue an order compelling Francis to attend a new mediation, to pay the entire cost of the mediator for the new session, and to pay $25,000 in attorney fees to reimburse the plaintiffs' attorneys for their lost time in the failed mediation. Such an action by the court puts the litigants back into the mediation, and penalizes Francis for getting mad and leaving the first mediation. But that's a far cry from locking up the CEO of the company and telling him he can't get out until his lawyers settle the civil case. That's not being a judge. That's being a tyrant, an autocrat. I suspect that the amount of money the plaintiffs want is totally outrageous. This judge may be close to one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs. He just took the bench about 16 months ago, so imagine what kind of ward heelign POS Bush would appoint to the federal bench in Florida in 2005. This is not a close call. I've been licensed to practice in federal courts for 30 years, and tried many cases - against and for big companies, and I have never heard of any federal judge pulling something as outrageous as this. This is some Bushler rightwing God Squader.
You're right about that, Rowdee, and that failure by the 11th circuit is deplorable. The appellate standard, however, is very forgiving of a trial court's powers to enforce their pretrial orders. If this were any defendant besides GGW, the 11th would probably have acted. This is all about GGW and Republicans in the federal bench not wanting to be seen helping GGW, and wanting to be seen opposing GGW's "immorality." Both the actions of the trial court and the circuit court are the result of the pathetic appointments Bush has made, and how he has foisted upon the nation these unworthy judges. These guys were picked by Rove and Gonzalez, among other ward heelers.
He shouted obscenities and threaten to "bury" the lawyers during their mediation efforts to settle the case. The girls lawyers told the Judge about it and he gave the pimp a choice, to be held in contempt of court for his behavior or settle the case. He didn't settle so the Judge held him in contempt for his behavior. If I were the Judge he would have been held in contempt whether he settled the case or not. Francis, a complete and total moron, then says he would pay a billion dollars to settle the case, which the moron doesn't even have, then he would appeal it and get the money back. Yeah, he's not only a pimp, he's a total moron.
God is always good! Your decisions are based upon your emotions, and your inability to separate your emotions from the issues. You hate the GGW guy because you are screwed down too tight. Once Francis resolves this, he'll hire a PI and spend a few hundred thousand finding out every piece of dirt on the judge.
They wouldn't allow him to go free because they knew he was a flight risk. He already was on the run when he got caught, knowing full well he was supposed to turn himself in for contempt of court.
God is always good! Francis' presence is not necessary for the resolution of the case. Do think the Chairman of Exxon Mobil attends mediations of cases involving them? I can assure you they don't. The standard is that someone from the company with settlement authority must be there. Why don't you simply admit that in your world, the only thing that matters is the outcome, that you don't care a whit about having a justice system that isn't simply a judge deciding what should happen, without reference to 500 years of jurisprudence?
Like I said, it wasn't hard to see what kind of "industry" you work in. LOL!
God is always good! Your industry must be that one with all the pedophiles and thieves. What do they call it? Oh yeah, religion. Isn't it obvious that Joe Francis is doing God's will? If God didn't want Joe to take those videos, Joe wouldn't be able to. God is like that, you know. He micromanages this world. God even makes you make a fool of yourself. I'll bet God will make you do it again in this thread. Ain't God good?!
#12. To: Paul Revere, All (#0)
#13. To: rowdee (#10)
Really? Hmmm........maybe you should contacty the source and set them straight as to what the gentleman (?) is incarcerated for.
#14. To: rowdee (#12)
#15. To: Paul Revere (#14)
(Edited)
#16. To: rowdee (#15)
#17. To: Paul Revere (#16)
I don't see what is confusing. You challenged me regarding what I had reported, and failed to accurately state what and why the court had ruled.
#18. To: rowdee (#17)
(Edited)
#19. To: Ferret Mike (#11)
(Edited)
It doesn't raise many eyebrows here, unless you just moved here and are unfamiliar with local laws, or you hate this sort of display of secondary sexual characteristics in the first place.
#20. To: Diana (#19)
#21. To: Paul Revere (#18)
(Edited)
#22. To: rowdee (#21)
(Edited)
#23. To: Paul Revere (#22)
#24. To: Ferret Mike (#11)
#25. To: Paul Revere (#22)
#26. To: Sam Houston (#2)
The only problem I have with women baring their breasts in public is that often it is the ones you'd MOST like to keep them under wraps and covered up at ALL times who get the urge to do so.
#27. To: rowdee (#25)
(Edited)
Re-read my post, son.
#28. To: Paul Revere (#27)
#29. To: aristeides (#23)
I read on Daily Kos that Joe Francis is being prosecuted in Nevada by a prosecutor involved in the U.S. Attorneys scandal.
#30. To: rowdee (#28)
(Edited)
Never was there a more perfect time to say, "Fuck you and the horse you rode in on".......sonny!
#31. To: rowdee (#12)
"If someone behaves badly in a civil case, you punish them with a monetary sanction. It is alien to the justice system to say to a person who is not willing to settle a civil case that they should go to jail. You take the case to trial," Handzlik said.
#32. To: Paul Revere (#0)
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#33. To: RickyJ (#32)
In a world where sin is rewarded and do-gooders are punished how can one hope to see justice?
#34. To: christine (#31)
"If someone behaves badly in a civil case, you punish them with a monetary sanction. It is alien to the justice system to say to a person who is not willing to settle a civil case that they should go to jail. You take the case to trial," Handzlik said.
#35. To: Paul Revere (#0)
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#36. To: Paul Revere (#0)
Lawyers for the women told Smoak that Francis became enraged during the settlement talks, shouting obscenities at the lawyers and threatening to "bury them." Smoak ordered Francis to settle the case or go to jail for his behavior.
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#37. To: RickyJ (#36)
(Edited)
He was sent to jail for his behavior during the civil trial you nit-wit.
#38. To: RickyJ (#35)
Here is a picture of the pimp that makes 29 million a YEAR filming girls with their tops off. How many of these girls ever see a check? My bet is very few. The Judge has a right to be pissed off at this low-life.
#39. To: Paul Revere (#0)
#40. To: Paul Revere (#37)
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#41. To: RickyJ (#40)
(Edited)
Here's another picture of your girl friend you are defending over an honorable Judge doing the right thing under the law. Yeah, it is pretty obvious what kind of "industry" you work in.
#42. To: christine (#31)
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta refused to let him remain free pending an appeal
#43. To: Mekons4 (#39)
#44. To: rowdee (#42)
Apparently the Court of Appeals didn't have a problem with the judge's ruling on contempt when they wouldn't allow him to be free on bail.
#45. To: Mekons4 (#39)
What did Francis actually do? I doubt it was something as vague as refusing to settle. He must have done something more to get this judge so pissed off. Then he evidently failed to appear.
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#46. To: RickyJ (#45)
(Edited)
#47. To: rowdee (#42)
Apparently the Court of Appeals didn't have a problem with the judge's ruling on contempt when they wouldn't allow him to be free on bail.
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#48. To: RickyJ (#47)
(Edited)
#49. To: Paul Revere (#41)
The industry I work in is the legal industry. I try cases. I'd strike you from the jury panel for cause.
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#50. To: RickyJ (#49)
(Edited)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest