I love Janine and miss the great scenes she did in porn. this judge who told her no more more, did not have that right. making porn is not against the law. and people have a right to make a living. Janine has every right to make porn, and to make a honest living any way she can. and it should not cost her the right to her child.and what she does best in my opinion, is make porn. this judge is out of line. WHO AGREES?
If I'm reading you correctly, this judge told Janine that he wouldn't award her custody of her child unless she quit doing porn. If that is what you're on about then, sorry, but he does have that right. Furthermore, making porn is against the law in 49 states. People do have a right to make a living, but not by breaking the law.
ahem... Don't confuse illegality with impossibility. People do illegal stuff all the time. Drugs, knock-offs, you name it; if there's a buck to be made then somebody's going to try it, legality be damned.
Fat bottomed girls make the rockin' world go round! 1551 Posts 5/09
Posted - Jul 5 2011 : 12:40AM
I agree that the criminal justice system in the United States is biased against sex workers. Janine Lindemulder deserves equal treatment, regardless of her occupation. Did the judge make his ruling based upon a social worker's interview with the child? Was the child questioned about what mom did for a living? Just because a kid grows up in a tough environment, if his mom is a stripper, or a porn actress, doesn't mean the kid will become a bad human being. The only thing the judge in this case is concerned about is his public image.
Porn stars are just like everybody else. they are people who love their kids just like any parent. it is not against the law in CA to make porn. and that is where Janine has lived and made porn before.who is this judge to tell her what she can and can't do? Maby Janie has no skills to do anything else. she has been doing porn most of her adult life. there are people who have killed people and gotten out of jail, who are free to live their lives.this judge went to far.Janine served her jail time and should be free to live her life likes she wants too.
It is none of the Judge business what Janine,s image is. some judges have a bad image.she did her jail time and should be free to live her life, as long she is is not hurting anyone or breaking the law. i wish Janine would come on here and tell her fans what is going on here.this is not right.
It is not exclusive of the USA but it is also true all over the world when there are minors involved the Judge not only has the right but also the duty to protect those minors , Janine isn't the only porn actress with sons and no judge is forcing them to leave porn not even when they divorce and their husband or the father their son could get the custody of the baby through law , so maybe and I repeat maybe this time something happened and the judge decided to stop her , I don't know what happened nor I know anything about that it's only a guess. The baby come first in any case , so we are pretty selfish wanting Janine to continue performing not matter what.
I don't know , but my question is how some judge had to decide? Why she was called into a court? If it was not her husband who the hell begun the cause?
I have no idea how this judge is able to do this.i know she went to court and lost her child to S. Bullock and J. James when they were married. she also went to jail on tax charges. she served her time on that.and she sould be free to live her life how she see's fit.she does not even have her child, J. James does. it's none of the judge business.
A Judge can't simply decide to Judge someone by his own will picking up him or she at random without some charges or any kind of accusation made by someone against someone else , so said there must be something the judge has been called to decide
How did you come to this conclusion? I can assure you that there is no such law prohibited the making of porn (except child porn) in Florida. There are several areas of Florida where questionable law enforcement activists have arrested people for distributing obscenity, such as the recent case in Polk County where Kimberly Kupps was arrested. But she was arrested not form making porn but for for DISTRIBUTING porn that the local area determined to be obscene. This is the curse of the failure of the US Supreme Court for not establishing clear guidelines on where the line between porn and obscene material is. The result is that you have a system where in South Florida, you can have Reality Kings making porn in public places, while in the rural part of Florida you can get arrested for a cell phone video of missionary position sex. As for a judge telling someone what they can and cannot do, if Janine is still on probation, the court can set any condition it feels necessary to accomplish the rehabilitative goal of the probation. As such, the judge can order her to stay away from people who are criminals, who use drugs or alcohol, or some of the other things that are prevalent in the porn world.
^ Eh, poor choice of words on my part, but if you can't distribute your product then it amounts to the same thing.
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
Posted - Jul 5 2011 : 10:20PM
Is there an actual link to the article for this ruling? Janine should have kept her nose clean and she wouldn't be having these issues now would she. I'd imagine, if this story is to be believed and/or is true, the judge in question is in the field of Child Protective Services or something like that, thus keeping an eye out for her kid's overall well being. If this is true, I'm sure the judge said something along the lines of, "Janine, you have two choices; 1, do porn and not have contact with your child, or 2, don't do porn and have contact with your child. She's an ex-con, she doesn't have the same rights as non criminals. She can do all the porn she wants, it'll be the trade off for not being a mom, that's all.
#SDNY he's all yours. -- Michael Steele 5110 Posts 3/03
Posted - Jul 5 2011 : 10:44PM
She's 20 years and 5 gallons of tattoo ink past her sell-by date, and she didn't want to do porn even when she was actually doing porn. If some judge is keeping her on the shelf, I say: thank you, your honor.
The issue in every custody case is "what is in the best interests of the child". If the judge made his or her decision based on that criteria, he or she did the right thing.
O please! if Janine does not want to make porn' so be it. but porn should not stop you from being able to see your child.what about other porn stars who have kids. are we going to make them stop doing porn too? as for her looks with the tats. she looks fine and sexy to me.personal attacks on Janine, won't change the fact that this judge is out of line.
100% agreed. When determining custody, "best interests of the child" is the relevant judicial standard. Babby (the original poster) is either confused about what the relevant standard is, or is arguing that the relevant standard should merely be what is legal (which I, personally, would not agree with). The thing is, there are plenty of things that are legal that are not conducive to being a fit parent. For example, it's legal to be a certified psychopath, but it doesn't make for a fit parent (or at least, all things other things being equal, it is a negative). It's legal to habitually sleep 23 hours a day, but it doesn't make for a fit parent (or, again, all other things being equal, when deciding between a parent who doesn't sleep 23 hours a day and one who does, it doesn't compare favorably). It's legal to be chronically drunk and unemployed 24/7/365, but it doesn't make for a fit parent. It's legal to be an invalid in a coma in a vegetative state, but it doesn't make for a fit parent. It's legal to live outside of the country 364 days of the year, but it doesn't make for a fit parent. The vast majority of the time, it's not the state's business, but sometimes it is (e.g., when divorced parents are disputing over which of the two should have custody, in which case, you've got to decide between the two (with one having visitation rights), and if you have to decide between the two, shouldn't you award custody to the most fit parent?). Now, it might be a different and debatable question, whether working in porn actually makes for an unfit parent (though most people probably would think that it does). But it doesn't change the fact that, when deciding between which would be the better of the two parents, there are plenty of legal things that could and should be regarded unfavorably. Should a career in porn be regarded unfavorably. Maybe, maybe not. But the question isn't whether what's legal. It's which of the two parents would make for the better primary parent.
Im not talking about who should get the child. im talking about her right to do her job and see her child. she should not have to choose between the two. no one has answered the question. should women doing porn have to make this choice. stop doing porn, or lose your child? don't go off on anything else. answer the question.
It's not just the justice system. Most people are biased against sex workers. Public opinion and the general lack of any protest enables the justice system to be unfair in cases like this. Edited by - randomprecision on 7/6/2011 12:36:25 PM
It's none of my business what someone does for a living. as long as they are not breaking law or hurting anyone, IT's NONE OF MY BUSINESS. porn stars love and raise good kids just like anyone else. the choice should not ever be between your job and your child. that's why what this judge did makes me so mad.
but it is the duty of Judge if there are claims on a matter , so if someone put a claim of any sort on Janine the the judge has every right to do his job , as of yet nobody said WHY the judge decided in that way nor if there were former accusations or anything relevant to this case. It might be true that in the USA the Justice System is unfair with sex performers , I can't tell I'm not American.
Let's say that you're a sailor. Your job keeps you at sea for much of the year. Your wife decides to divorce you. The judge says, "As a sailor, you are away from home a lot. Unless you change jobs I'm awarding custody of your child to your wife, because you can't be there to care for him." Would you rather change jobs or let the kid go to the wife?
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
Posted - Jul 6 2011 : 3:29PM
Sorry, but the issue isn't what other girls are doing, it's what Janine is doing. And in this case, the child's father and possibly Sandra Bullock are making it an issue.
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
Posted - Jul 6 2011 : 3:32PM
Im not talking about who should get the child. im talking about her right to do her job and see her child. she should not have to choose between the two. no one has answered the question. should women doing porn have to make this choice. stop doing porn, or lose your child? don't go off on anything else. answer the question.
For example , and I'm not saying janine did this, if you're divorced , and you go to work and there's nobody to leave your son, would you take him at work in a porn set? It's not the same as a waitress taking his baby at work nor any other actress taking their baby in a mainstream set. Now we could be as naive as we want but many in porn environment are regular drug consumers , some are addicted and you won't allow any person to bring a baby into such places. Who on earth would allow this?
I agree with you 100% that what is best for the child comes first. and if Janine(and im not saying she is)has all those problems, then OK on not letting the child live with her. the drugs is the main reason i say that.not the job she does. i have no inside imfo on this. im just going by what i read on the internet a while back. Maby you and others know more than i do about it.if im wrong im wrong. Edited by - babby on 7/6/2011 5:16:26 PM
I know nothing for sure, the judge does , maybe druds have nothing to do with this I don't know but I assume as a given that a judge won't play with the lives of other people , his (or her) decisions are motivated , in 99% of the cases. I'm aware however that there are some bad Judges but unless there are some evidences I assume this one did what he had to do.
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
None whatsoever. Someone has already said that's she's 20 years and 5 gallons of ink too late. There was a time when Janine could have made a great living by doing porn but those days are gone. Does she really have that many fans willing to dish out money to see a 43 years old woman who's body is completely covered in tattoos?
hell yeah she is gorgeous and if she does more interracial she will do great
[Link]
90nine55 Deactivated User
124 Posts 11/09
Posted - Jul 6 2011 : 9:40PM
Agreed, I would love to see Janine do more Porn! I think the MILF thing is best thing going in Porn period! If Janine did some Dogfart work, that would be awesome! I love her tats and I'm not even a big tattoo lover, that sets her apart from the rest of the MILFs.
Shouldn't matter! She's has a good amount of fame to at least warrant being able to do something with her life. We're still have an economy that's down. She wouldn't be unlike any other person who might be struggling, not that I know she is struggling, so why the double or different standard? I really get the feeling that judge is holding her porn career against her, which is beyond his power IMHO, or at least should be. Judges have always had broad powers though, which makes them capable of being corrupt or power crazy with few ways of reeling-them-in. It's supposed to even-the-playing-field from government I guess, but sometimes I wonder if it does the exact opposite. Even the Supreme Court is looking suspect more and more these. Edited by - aplus on 7/7/2011 5:14:38 PM
Posted - Jul 4 2011 : 10:26PM