First of 22 women who filed a lawsuit against the adult video service Girls Do Porn claims in court she was told the x-rated scenes were for overseas private collectors - and that she was paid $2,000 less because she had 'bruises and pale skin'
https://www.pornhub.com/channels/girlsdoporn
https://www.youporn.com/channel/765/girls-do-porn/
Twenty-two women who filed a lawsuit against the popular adult video service Girls Do Porn are claiming in court they were conned into filming the x-rated scenes.
On Monday, the first of the 22 women, who are all identified from Jane Doe 1 to 22, gave testimony at San Diego Superior Court that she responded to a Craigslist advert in 2016 and was coerced into performing before being paid less than agreed.
Jane Doe 15 said that the video was circulated widely online - despite contractual promises that the recordings was to be distributed on DVD abroad only.
The lawsuit alleges that the company made millions in profits by coercing young women into the scenes, by initially advertising themselves online as a modelling website and lying to them about the conditions of the scenes.
On Monday, the first of the 22 women, identified as Jane Doe 1-22, gave testimony that she responded to a Craigslist advert in 2016, was coerced into performing, paid less than she was promised and that the video was circulated widely online - despite contractual promises that the recording was to be distributed on DVD abroad only
Girls Do Porn, an adult subscription service started in 2006, by New Zealand man Michael Pratt, trafficked in x-rated videos involving women aged 18-22, advertising that it was the 'one and only time [the girls] do porn.'
But the 22 women claim Pratt and his associates defrauded and underpaid the women, making false promises about the distribution of the material to victims, many of whom were too young to drink.
According to the lawsuit, the young woman, who was 18 at the time, admitted she consented to the shoots but only on the understanding that the videos would not include any identifying information, and would only be distributed to private collectors abroad.
Despite the understanding, Doe 15's testimony along with her peers' declarations claimed they later discovered the tapes had been widely distributed online - along with their names, phone numbers and personal information.
Girls Do Porn, an adult subscription service started in 2006, by Michael Pratt (pictured), trafficked in x-rated videos involving women aged 18-22, advertising that it was the 'one and only time [the girls] do porn'
Doe 15 said in her testimony: 'If I had known that, not only was it going on the internet but that they were posting it on the internet, that my name would be attached to it, that it would be in the United States, and that I wouldn't be paid $5,000, but $2,000 less, and insulted because I was pale and bruised; if I had known that it was more than 30 minutes of filming, if I had known any of that, just any one of those; if I had known that other girls had been harassed and kicked out of school for it, if I had known that I would be kicked off the cheer team; if I had known any of that, I wouldn't have done it,' the Daily Beast reported.
According to Doe 15, she responded to a Craigslist advert for models. When she was contacted by a 'Jonathan N' - who attorneys claim is a pseudonym for Pratt - called her and offered her $5,000 to film adult scenes.
The agreement was five sexual positions, each for around seven minutes and that it would be filmed in a San Diego hotel, with return flights to the city covered by them.
'He said it would be 30 minutes of filming sex,' Doe 15 recalled in court. 'He said it would be $5,000 dollars. He said specifically about five positions, five to seven minutes each. He would fly me out to San Diego, pay for a hotel.
'And then he just repeatedly said: 'Not online, not online, not in the U.S.' - it would be on DVDs to Australia, the UK. And then he said a few other really remote countries, I don't remember. And then I asked if I could just do regular modeling, and he said no, it had to be both.'
She was even allegedly put in contact with two women who themselves had apparently been filmed and had never been exposed, to assuage her fears.
One such woman has since admitted she was paid to speak to the victims and convince them, earning $2-300-a-time.
The plaintiff alleges on the day of filming the adult star she would partner with arrived and immediately threw up, and then began smoking cannabis which he offered to her.
According to Doe 15, she responded to a Craigslist advert for models. When she was contacted by a 'Jonathan N' - who attorneys claim is a pseudonym for Pratt - called her and offered her $5,000 to film adult scenes
Doe 15's attorneys attest that it undermined her ability to sign contracts.
Meanwhile, the adult film star, called Andre Garcia, only paid her $3,000 and not the agreed higher sum because 'she was pale and had bruises.'
Despite agreements to the contrary, Doe 15 claims the videos were quickly circulated online and her entire friendship group and many college peers became aware.
She said was kicked off her cheerleading squad, began suffering from panic attacks, and moved away from the campus to relieve her anxiety. Additionally, it affected her relationship with her boyfriend, a college baseballer who was left 'humiliated.'
The case in ongoing, with more women still to provide their testimony. It was reported that the adult film company has attempted so far to disrupt proceedings by filing bankruptcy, intentional subpoena dodging, and another series of miscellaneous delays.
In a previous statement to NBC 7, Aaron Sadock, the website owners' attorney, said all of the women were of age and signed contracts agreeing to be in the videos.
'The models...made statements on video agreeing the pornographic videos could be used in any manner the producer wished to use them,' wrote Sadock.
'Some models regret the choice they made. But those models were free to decide whether to star in a pornographic video or not. Nobody forced them.'
The DailyMail.com has approached Pratt's attorneys for comment.
Read more:
- The 22 women claim Girls Do Porn conned them into filming scenes under false conditions, including anonymity and overseas distribution to private collectors
- All listed as Jane Doe 1-22, Jane Doe 15 has detailed the ordeal she has suffered
- She claims she was lied to about the length and conditions of her x-rated scene
- Lawyers for Doe 15 say her ingesting cannabis impaired her ability to sign papers
- Girls Do Porn, an adult subscription service started in 2006, by New Zealand man Michael Pratt, trafficked in x-rated videos involving women aged 18-22
https://www.pornhub.com/channels/girlsdoporn
https://www.youporn.com/channel/765/girls-do-porn/
Twenty-two women who filed a lawsuit against the popular adult video service Girls Do Porn are claiming in court they were conned into filming the x-rated scenes.
On Monday, the first of the 22 women, who are all identified from Jane Doe 1 to 22, gave testimony at San Diego Superior Court that she responded to a Craigslist advert in 2016 and was coerced into performing before being paid less than agreed.
Jane Doe 15 said that the video was circulated widely online - despite contractual promises that the recordings was to be distributed on DVD abroad only.
The lawsuit alleges that the company made millions in profits by coercing young women into the scenes, by initially advertising themselves online as a modelling website and lying to them about the conditions of the scenes.
On Monday, the first of the 22 women, identified as Jane Doe 1-22, gave testimony that she responded to a Craigslist advert in 2016, was coerced into performing, paid less than she was promised and that the video was circulated widely online - despite contractual promises that the recording was to be distributed on DVD abroad only
Girls Do Porn, an adult subscription service started in 2006, by New Zealand man Michael Pratt, trafficked in x-rated videos involving women aged 18-22, advertising that it was the 'one and only time [the girls] do porn.'
But the 22 women claim Pratt and his associates defrauded and underpaid the women, making false promises about the distribution of the material to victims, many of whom were too young to drink.
According to the lawsuit, the young woman, who was 18 at the time, admitted she consented to the shoots but only on the understanding that the videos would not include any identifying information, and would only be distributed to private collectors abroad.
Despite the understanding, Doe 15's testimony along with her peers' declarations claimed they later discovered the tapes had been widely distributed online - along with their names, phone numbers and personal information.
Girls Do Porn, an adult subscription service started in 2006, by Michael Pratt (pictured), trafficked in x-rated videos involving women aged 18-22, advertising that it was the 'one and only time [the girls] do porn'
Doe 15 said in her testimony: 'If I had known that, not only was it going on the internet but that they were posting it on the internet, that my name would be attached to it, that it would be in the United States, and that I wouldn't be paid $5,000, but $2,000 less, and insulted because I was pale and bruised; if I had known that it was more than 30 minutes of filming, if I had known any of that, just any one of those; if I had known that other girls had been harassed and kicked out of school for it, if I had known that I would be kicked off the cheer team; if I had known any of that, I wouldn't have done it,' the Daily Beast reported.
According to Doe 15, she responded to a Craigslist advert for models. When she was contacted by a 'Jonathan N' - who attorneys claim is a pseudonym for Pratt - called her and offered her $5,000 to film adult scenes.
The agreement was five sexual positions, each for around seven minutes and that it would be filmed in a San Diego hotel, with return flights to the city covered by them.
'He said it would be 30 minutes of filming sex,' Doe 15 recalled in court. 'He said it would be $5,000 dollars. He said specifically about five positions, five to seven minutes each. He would fly me out to San Diego, pay for a hotel.
'And then he just repeatedly said: 'Not online, not online, not in the U.S.' - it would be on DVDs to Australia, the UK. And then he said a few other really remote countries, I don't remember. And then I asked if I could just do regular modeling, and he said no, it had to be both.'
She was even allegedly put in contact with two women who themselves had apparently been filmed and had never been exposed, to assuage her fears.
One such woman has since admitted she was paid to speak to the victims and convince them, earning $2-300-a-time.
The plaintiff alleges on the day of filming the adult star she would partner with arrived and immediately threw up, and then began smoking cannabis which he offered to her.
According to Doe 15, she responded to a Craigslist advert for models. When she was contacted by a 'Jonathan N' - who attorneys claim is a pseudonym for Pratt - called her and offered her $5,000 to film adult scenes
Doe 15's attorneys attest that it undermined her ability to sign contracts.
Meanwhile, the adult film star, called Andre Garcia, only paid her $3,000 and not the agreed higher sum because 'she was pale and had bruises.'
Despite agreements to the contrary, Doe 15 claims the videos were quickly circulated online and her entire friendship group and many college peers became aware.
She said was kicked off her cheerleading squad, began suffering from panic attacks, and moved away from the campus to relieve her anxiety. Additionally, it affected her relationship with her boyfriend, a college baseballer who was left 'humiliated.'
The case in ongoing, with more women still to provide their testimony. It was reported that the adult film company has attempted so far to disrupt proceedings by filing bankruptcy, intentional subpoena dodging, and another series of miscellaneous delays.
In a previous statement to NBC 7, Aaron Sadock, the website owners' attorney, said all of the women were of age and signed contracts agreeing to be in the videos.
'The models...made statements on video agreeing the pornographic videos could be used in any manner the producer wished to use them,' wrote Sadock.
'Some models regret the choice they made. But those models were free to decide whether to star in a pornographic video or not. Nobody forced them.'
The DailyMail.com has approached Pratt's attorneys for comment.
Read more:
Women are something else I tell ya. I can’t believe she really said that in court
