Quantcast

Shock Porn Director Ira Isaacs Sentenced To 4 Years Under Obscenity Laws

Get the WebProNews Newsletter:
<
[ Life]

It’s rare that we get an obscenity conviction in the American legal systems these days. Compared to the early 20th century, people are far less likely to find content “obscene.” One porn director, however, was found on the wrong side of the law when he produced a number of films with titles like Mako’s First Time Scat, Gang Bang Horse and Hollywood Scat Amateurs.

The FBI announced today that Ira Isaacs has been sentenced to 48 months in prison “for engaging in the business of producing and selling obscene videos and distributing obscene videos.” Alongside the prison sentence, Isaacs was also sentenced to three years of supervised released and ordered to pay a $10,000 fine.

Evidence presented at trial established that beginning in or about 1999 and continuing until at least 2011, Isaacs, doing business under the name LA. Media, operated numerous websites, through which he advertised and sold obscene videos that he acquired from other people. The obscene videos included a video approximately two hours in length of a female engaging in sex acts involving human bodily waste and a video one hour and 37 minutes in length of a female engaged in sex acts with animals. The evidence presented at trial also established that in approximately 2004, Isaacs began operating under the name Stolen Car Films and made obscene videos in which he instructed women to engage in sexual activity involving human bodily waste.

As is the case with all obscenity trials, the poor jurors had to sit through Isaac’s films to determine if they had any artistic value whatsoever. Then they had to apply a three-step test that was first laid out by at the time Chief Justice Warren Burger in 1973′s Miller v. California:

The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether ‘the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

If Isaacs could prove that his films fell under one of these three exemptions, he would be found innocent. The jury obviously felt that his films lacked any kind of artistic value, and the obscenity conviction was upheld.

It’s increasingly rare to see convictions for obscenity in our nation. I’ll leave what that means for the moral fiber of our citizens up to you. That being said, you probably shouldn’t start a career in directing scat porn anytime soon.

[h/t: LA Weekly]

Shock Porn Director Ira Isaacs Sentenced To 4 Years Under Obscenity Laws
Top Rated White Papers and Resources
  • http://bossy-girls.net Lila Sovietskaya

    Scat videos are available for free in tube sites. Why the authorities do not look there? What is obscenity is highly subjective. Example, some people feel that miniskirts and women with naked faces are obscene. What is ‘local community’? The local city? On the Internet the whole world is the local community. Were the people who bought the disgusting videos unaware of what they were purchasing and therefore victimized? Who are the victims of obscenity? Islamic countries have taken steps to protect their residents from viewing media that does not meet the high moral standards that religion imposes. Any nation that does not like something can restrict freedom. In the Vatican there are antique paintings of nude kids posing as angels. Is that child exploitations? Should the Vatican museum remove such paintings? How do we judge what is artistic and what is obscene? Maybe to someone nude children are obscene or of prurient interest and therefore fall under obscenity laws. The more you try to regulate something the fuzzier it becomes and more loopholes are created. The general public should not be exposed against their will to images that disturb them. That is true. But where do we stop? The sentence against Isaac appears disproportionate and unjust

  • Marissa Bergen

    I agree. The American legal system has, once again wasted it’s time and money in going after someone like Ira Isaacs. So much for freedom of speech. If someone is disgusted, they can look away.

  • PervBear

    You all forgot about the yummy beasality porn he has shot. He is just famous for the 2 girls 1 cup.

  • Bill Kadoody

    While the judge may believe that he was just doing his doody, the severity of the sentence clearly shows that the judge took a dump on free speech and dropped a major bomb with his ruling. An actor close to Mr. Isaacs claimed that the judges’s ruling was total crap and quoting Shakespeare stated, “something smells rotten in the state of California”.

    Mr. Isaacs’ wife, Lassie, barked out that she believed that the judge completely misunderstood the closing statements by their lawyer who posited that his client’s films were fecund.

    People close to the case voiced their belief that the judge was a stool pigeon for big government and was pressured to hand out a sharp sentence by higher-ups deep within the Bowels of the judiciary. Many agreed that the ruling stinks and that the judge must be from the planet Uranus.

    Friends of the film maker indicated that his lawyer did doodly squat and that it was the lawyers poorly stated argument that left the case in the toilet.

    What can we do as free people? We must poo poo these harsh unreasonable sentences.

    While, the film maker appears to have a cavalier attitude regarding the situation, those close to him state that he realizes that he is in deep doo doo, but are astonished that he appears to be reveling in his situation.

    I hope that this fellow gets a new trial and that the situation will be rectal-fired soon.

  • monica

    A jew will do anything for the almighty dollar.

    • Fallopian

      Idiot!

  • Michael

    Have women, who have done the same to men for real (not fake) in the U.S., faced similar charges?