This is what they are saying about it on
avn.com DALLAS - The attorney for Garry and Tamara Ragsdale, who were both convicted on three federal obscenity charges yesterday for having sold videos that depicted rape and BDSM scenarios that involved penetration, intends to file an appeal as soon as the former police officer and his wife are sentenced in January.
“There are a lot of first amendment issues to bring up, the judge not allowing comparable videos, the judge not allow evidence that a lawyer had been consulted regarding the tapes – we have plenty of options,” Clinton Broden, who defended the Ragsdales in their trial, told AVN.com
The Ragsdales are each facing up to twenty years in jail, though Broden states that federal sentencing guidelines suggest the couple will only be sentenced with two to three years. On the other hand, the judge could decide to issue the maximum sentence.
Garry Ragsdale, 34, and his wife, Tamara, 32, were each convicted of one count of conspiracy to mail obscene material, two counts of mailing obscene material and aiding and abetting. The verdict was reached after 5 1/2 hours of deliberations following five days of testimony.
According to Broden, those charges were filed on the basis of eight videos the couple had, including two that were mailed to undercover officers in a sting. The police investigated the Ragsdales after receiving a tip from a German national who had come across their site.
The videos in question included Brutally Raped IV, V, and VI, which are from a Dutch studio. Unlabeled tapes, as well as some from Florida-based ZFX were also looked at.
The videos in question were pirated, with the couple duping tapes from their home, though charges for that were not filed.
For the most part, the prosecutors in the case relied upon the videos to present their case.
“They rely on the movies. They fought us at every turn as far as educating the public about what is out there in terms of comparable videos,” Broden said.
Broden had difficulties introducing comparable videos for the jury to watch, with the judge turning down all seven of his adult video submissions, as well as the mainstream movies Basic Instinct and Baise Moi.
Adult literature by authors such as Ann Rice was also submitted and also denied.
Two videos, that Broden says were the tamest of his submissions, were allowed after questions from the prosecution opened the door for them. One of the videos was Dark Room, a gay fisting video that included a depiction of a man being raped at knifepoint.
Finding appropriate videos was difficult because of the sexual penetration that was shown in the videos the Ragsdales sold. While Broden found some BDSM videos that went further in terms of graphic violence, none of those had sexual penetration.
Another obstacle was the Ragsdales’ untenable claim that they had sought the advice of a Fort Worth based lawyer before deciding to sell the videos. Larry Brown, the lawyer they claim was consulted by their former business partner, denies ever having spoken to Clarence Thomas Gartman, who was once the business partner of the Ragsdales, and the man they say consulted Brown.
Garry Ragsdale met Gartman while moonlighting as a bouncer at a TGI Fridays restaurant that Gartman managed. Knowing that Gartman was familiar with Web technology, Ragsdale, a body builder, approached Gartman for advice on a Website selling herbal supplements. Gartman suggested they also sell rape videos.
According to Broden, it was Gartman who obtained the videos and Gartman who cleared the videos with a lawyer. Then the partners had a falling out and Gartman set up his own operation, ForbiddenVideos.com, which also sold rape tapes.
To Broden, the consulting of a lawyer is a critical part of the Ragsdales defense. He agrees that the Ragsdales would not have sold the tapes in question if they did not feel that they were legal.
“That’s the sad thing. When they were raided in 1998, they stopped. They haven’t sold tapes since then,” Broden said.
“There’s not a list that anyone can go to. People are left to guess and risk a felony conviction. That’s a ridiculous problem.”
Gartman has reportedly left the country, though he is believed to enter the United States from time to time. It has been rumored that Gartman is the subject of a grand jury investigation.
While local authorities dropped the case in 1998 in anticipation of a more severe penalty from the state, Garry Ragsdale was let go from his position as a patrol officer on the police force because the police chief felt that Ragsdale had broken local obscenity laws.
However, the state dropped their case as well, saying that do so “was in the interest of justice.”
According to Broden, that was likely because the prosecutors felt they had a much better shot of a conviction by taking the case to federal level. As a state case, the jury would have been selected from the more sophisticated city of Dallas. Instead, jurors were drawn not only from Dallas, but from the rural areas that surround the city as well.
Broden noted that resulted in a jury pool that included people who didn’t even watch mainstream TV, because they felt it was too sexual.
Then in July of 2002 the case was re-opened by request of the Department of Justice. In March of 2003 an indictment was handed down.
“John Ashcroft is my consistent answer [as to why the case was reopened] and really the only answer I have to offer,” Broden said, suggesting that the approaching five-year statue of limitations deadline gave the Ragsdales’ case a priority.
The Ragsdale case is the first of three recent federal obscenity cases launched this year. Fellow Texan Jon Coil and his family and a number of his associates are facing obscenity charges, as are Rob Black and Extreme.
Broden doesn’t know of any connection between the Coil case and the Ragsdales or any other obscenity cases for that matter.
“We’ll see where they go. But my theory is this is going to be the first of many,” Broden said.
Previous Topic
Index
