Looks like one of the women that they shot while the case was ongoing has joined in and decided to testify against them. Another person had already said that they were still shooting when the case was going to trial, this mostly just corroborates that and shows how they changed their story from "It'll only be on DVD and never online" to "It'll be online, but on a member restricted website that isn't available in the US".

[Link]

One of the Does testified that she got cheek fillers to alter the structure of her face, microbladed her eyebrows, moved from place to place, etc but the scandal keeps following her. She talked about holding a loaded gun as she considered ending her life.

I don't see this ending well for anyone involved, including the so-called producers.

[Link]

rethorical question obviously

[Link]

PS. Glad to see the misogynist troll Realtip and his 'facts' finally was deactivated. Dude was a case of anal warts on this forum.

Edited by - BlackSix on 11/14/2019 3:55:31 AM

[Link]

But one thing is for sure when it comes to sites with real amateur girls who for the most part don't do anymore porn it's the best site we have ever seen. The problem with sites like this is it's very hard to keep finding hot girls weekly who don't end up mainstream. There's been more epic hot young girls on than any other 5 sites combined. I love the very hard sex but if you don't like that format I also understand.

Hopefully if they do go away another site takes up the slack exploitedcollegegirls is a good site I like the format but they don't make an effort or don't do a good job finding under the radar girls much anymore it's mostly just girls getting started mainstream

Edited by - Mrc68 on 11/21/2019 2:55:57 PM

[Link]

Here's the irony: a lot of production companies feature girls who pretend to be naive while fully understanding that they will be seen online. But GDP featured girls who really were naive, and genuinely mortified when they were shown online.

[Link]

Lying to people about how the sex scene is going to be used is clearly illegal and the fact the FBI got involved and there was so much evidence plus their behaviour as exposed in the texts makes it clear they are as guilty as hell.

[Link]

Keep an eye out for the GDP-affiliated defendants to file papers in opposition. In parallel, this could also put a stake in the ground for the parties to settle. Meanwhile, the criminal case continues to grind ahead unaffected by developments in the civil case.

News article: https://www.courthousenews.com/women-win-13-million-in-girlsdoporn-fraud-suit/

Judge's proposed decision, with damages outlined in Section H on pages 182-186: https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/GirlsDoPorn-VERDICT.pdf

[Link]

News article

Proposed decision

[Link]

https://gizmodo.com/victims-win-13-million-in-lawsuit-against-girlsdoporn-1840791241

[Link]

"The women allegedly responded to Craigslist ads seeking clothed models and payment of around $US5000, but eventually were told the job was for adult films.

Authorities said the defendants convinced the women their videos would not be posted online, with some told they were for a private collector"

"Over the phone, ... told Jane Doe 1 that the video 'was just for this one guy ... on one DVD that couldn't be copied'," 

[Link]

He'll have to be a hermit if he's in any country that has an extradition agreement with the US.

[Link]

Edited by - LCF on 10/17/2020 5:53:25 AM

[Link]

In June 2016, four women filed a lawsuit in the San Diego Superior Court against Wolfe, Pratt, Garcia, and GirlsDoPorn. Six months later, the lawsuit had 14 plaintiffs; within a year, the number was 22.[12][13] Plaintiffs were aged between 17 and 22 during recruiting of their videos for GirlsDoPorn and most of them were college students at the time of filming the video. 10 of the 22 plaintiffs reported that they wanted to leave at some point before or during the shoot but were made to complete it. The plaintiffs testified on how the release of the videos adversely affected their college life, career plans and plans for having a family.[4][25] The plaintiffs requested more than $22 million in damages.[25] The defendants stood accused of "intentional misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, unlawful and fraudulent business practices, and the intentional infliction of emotional distress".[6] Brian Holm was a lead attorney, with John O'Brien as co-counsel.[30][38] Eventually the legal team of the 22 plaintiffs grew to include multiple law firms including Sanford Heisler Sharp LLP.[4] Attorney Daniel Kaplan also represented GirlsDoPorn in the lawsuit.[1][17]
Trial and chargesEdit

An initial trial date was set for March 8, 2018,[13] but the trial was set back by several different delays.[33] In January 2019, the judge set a tentative ruling that Wolfe, Pratt, and Garcia had engaged in "malice, fraud or oppression". The same day, Pratt filed for bankruptcy, and the case was put on hold.[13] The bankruptcy judge deemed that Pratt had acted in bad faith, so the case resumed in early 2019.[1] After further delay, trial began on August 20, 2019,[39] lasting until November 2019. Kevin Enright served as the judge.[25]
GirlsDoPorn website owner Michael James Pratt fled the USA in 2019 and is currently wanted by the FBI.

In September 2019, attorneys were told that Pratt had left the country, according to NBC 7 San Diego.[39] The following month, Garcia and Wolfe were arrested on charges of sex trafficking after a search warrant was executed by the FBI.[1][40][41] As of January 2021, Pratt is on the FBI's most wanted list.[42][43][44] Wolfe was denied bail in October 2019,[45] and again in May 2020.[38]

In November 2019 a federal indictment was unsealed naming three more individuals-Theodore Gyi, Valorie Moser and Amberlyn Dee Nored-as defendants. Gyi had acted as videographer. Moser was the administrative assistant who had worked for Pratt for almost three years. She had also testified on the plaintiffs' behalf in the trial. Amberlyn had acted as a fake reference girl on Pratt's behalf. She had never shot a pornographic video for GirlsDoPorn or any other production.[3][4]

Pratt alone has been charged with producing child pornography of a 16-year-old girl in 2012 and of sex trafficking of a minor.[21][25] Additional charges for Pratt and the other five include conspiracy to commit sex trafficking by force, fraud and coercion and sex trafficking by force, fraud and coercion. The crimes are alleged to have happened in October 2013, January 2015, May 2015, January 2016 and February 2016.[3]

There are multiple reported cases of attempted disruption or obstruction during the trial. Attorney Holm was harassed throughout the legal process, with fake gay porn images of him spread, and one woman testifying that she was paid to make repeated harassing phone calls to him by a GirlsDoPorn employee.[46][47] He reported that harassing posts on social media and pornography blogs were made about himself, his wife and young daughter, and that a private investigator was hired to follow him.[38] In a separate case, brothers Fredrick Jimenez and Efrain Jimenez were charged in December 2019 for obstruction of sex trafficking enforcement. The complaint states that they tried to remove and destroy evidence related to the federal sex trafficking in October 2019. Fredrick Jimenez was an ex-employee of GirlsDoPorn.[5]

Prosecutors also collated evidence of witness harassment:[45] a U.S. attorney found evidence that defendants called the plaintiffs to falsely pose as journalists.[48][38] A witness alleged that a co-defendant offered her $1,000 in exchange for not testifying in the trial.[45] FBI agents found a planned video script, "22 Whores + 5 Shady Lawyers VS GirlsDoPorn", which encouraged viewers to spread the real names of the plaintiffs.[48][38][45] In December 2020, Garcia pled guilty to federal charges of sex trafficking by force, fraud, and coercion. His sentence is scheduled for March 2021.[49][50] In January 2021, Gyi pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit sex trafficking by force, fraud and coercion. He lied to performers that their videos would not be posted on the internet. He is due to be sentenced in April.[18][50][51]
Lawsuit outcomesEdit

On January 2, 2020, the women in the trial were awarded $12.775 million in damages-$9.475 million for compensatory damages and $3.3 million in punitive damages.[11] On January 9, Faith Devine was appointed receiver over the business and individual assets of the defendants.[52] Furthermore, the women were given ownership rights to the videos they featured in.[10] The ruling ordered defendants to remove all images and videos from websites under their control, and to take action to remove them from other websites.[35]

In the injunction, the court ordered GirlsDoPorn to clearly state in bold and centered at the top of the first page of their model agreement that the video was going to be published on GirlsDoPorn.com. The verbal release must also show the model clearly stating the name of the website.[4] Additionally, they were ordered in the future to state in recruitment postings that videos will be posted online, give participants copies of the contracts before arriving, and ensure that participants sign documents indicating that they understand their names or personal information may be used.[10] Later in January 2020, another woman sued the men involved with GirlsDoPorn with a similar case to the 22 previous plaintiffs.[53]
MindGeek lawsuitEdit

On December 16, 2020, 40 women involved with GirlsDoPorn filed a lawsuit against MindGeek-a company that owns Pornhub, Tube8 and other pornography websites-for damages including distress, ostracization, trauma and attempted suicide. The lawsuit claims that MindGeek knew about the company's sex trafficking as early as 2009 and definitely by fall 2016, but continued to partner with GirlsDoPorn until the company became defunct. The site featured GirlsDoPorn as a Content Partner and a member of the Viewshare Program. The lawsuit also alleges that MindGeek failed to remove GirlsDoPorn videos despite requests for removal by victims, as recently as December 2020. The plaintiffs are seeking $80 million in damages. The lawsuit follows a New York Times article about Pornhub and GirlsDoPorn, following which Pornhub began to remove videos from unverified users.[54][55][56] On April 1, 2021, another 10 women joined the lawsuit against Mindgeek, bringing the total number of plaintiffs to 50.[57]
References https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GirlsDoPorn

[Link]

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/pr/twenty-year-sentence-girlsdoporn-sex-trafficking-conspiracy

[Link]

Spanish police on Friday said they had arrested one of the U.S. FBI's Ten Most Wanted fugitives, who was staying at a hotel in Madrid under a false identity.

[Link]

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/courts/story/2023-10-02/girlsdoporn-wiederhold-san-diego-sex-trafficking-charges

[Link]