Pornography

Reason.tv: All Charges Dismissed! John Stagliano Reacts Outside the Courthouse

|

John Stagliano was cleared of all charges today in a federal obscenity prosecution that could have put him behind bars for 32 years. After hearing the prosecution's case, the judge declared that there was not enough evidence to continue the trial, throwing out all charges.

Reason.tv caught up with Stagliano outside the courthouse just minutes after the decision.

For more on the Stagliano case, obscenity, and freedom of expression, go to here.

Advertisement

NEXT: California Roundup: Raging nurses, weed for the workers, Boxer's $10 million advantage

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Good for him.

  2. What an unbelievable waste of time and money, on top of nearly being a ridiculous injustice as well. The prosecution should be placed in a burlap sack and beaten with reeds, and then jailed for malicious prosecution.

    1. Heads and pikes.

      It never should have gone out of style.

      1. After a decent interval, I expect to see some crucifixions.

        1. Best thing the Romans did for Judea.

          1. “Best thing the Romans did for Judea.”

            Well,that and the roads..public order, sanitation, the aqueduct…

      2. Tar and feathers.

      3. Tar and feathers.

    2. Reeds? Fuck off, pussy. Spud bars.

      1. Color me so surprised that you missed the Dr. Evil reference, you festering hematoma.

        1. Color me surprised that you jack off to Austin Powers movies so much, you oversodomized sucking chest wound. You are worse than Tulpa.

          1. You are worse than Tulpa.

            You fuck, I used to tolerate your pathetic attempts to insult me, but this goes too far. Who the fuck do you think you are? And more importantly, how do I top that?

            1. “You are worse than joe” is the ultimate HNR trump.

              1. What about “worse than Edward”? Nah, nobody’s worse than Edward.

              2. “Worse than joe” is the nuclear option. It’s mutually assured degradation. It should never be used or even explicitly threatened.

                1. That is banned by interneational treaty.

                2. If I call someone worse than joe, do I win the thread?

                  1. No. You will be run out. An outlaw. Only Muadib could use that kind of weapon and survive the consiquences.

            2. Worse than LoneWacko?

              1. Shut the fuck up, guy who referenced Lonewacko.

                1. That’s esoteric? Wow. I’ve read way too many of these threads. I remember laughing hysterically with a friend over a verbal beatdown that Warty delivered to LW.

                  1. They had audio threads here?

                  2. This thread competes with a bathroom stall for wit.

            3. This thread makes me happy I lurk/post here. You cumdripping cockpumps.

          2. “you oversodomized sucking chest wound”

            That was kind of awesome.

            1. But we digress.

    3. What would you say to the prosecution now, if they were here in the room?

    4. Agreed, Epi. Though the Citizens United case was even more worthless.

      1. I disagree. Someone had to be brought up on un-Constitutional charges for the Supreme Court to begin restoring the 1st Amendment.

        1. Not seeing the logic there, sorry…

    5. I think they should face a squirting squad – but not milk enemas, regular enemas…that’ll teach ’em.

  3. Yee Haw!!!!!!!!!

    BUTTMAN IS FREE !!!!!!!!

    YEE HAW !!!!!!!!!!

  4. Instead of beating the prosecutors, make them pay with their own personal funds whatever cost they dumped on the public for filing screwed up charges of this kind.

    If they don’t have the cash, let them work it off sweeping streets and sidewalks for $5 per hour.

    Bet there wouldn’t be so many screwball charges.

  5. The opportunity of the title, “Porn Guy Got Off on Government…Charges” has been missed.

  6. Good for this guy. It is too bad that DOJ will never pay any price for harrassing this guy. I mean when you can’t even get your case before the jury, you have brought a case that should have never been brought.

    Meanwhile, reason number 1,230,487 to hate liberals. People having too much choice is a bad thing. No kidding

    http://www.thenation.com/artic…..n?page=0,1

    1. I stopped reading after the second paragraph. These people have never heard of reviews or word-of-mouth?

      1. I just don’t understand the mentality that would be bothered by people reading more of the books they want. It just baffles me.

        1. “Personalization strikes me as a mixed blessing. While it gives people what they want?or what they think they want?it also engineers spontaneity out of the picture. The happy accident, the freakish discovery, ceases to exist. And that’s a problem.”

          Really? An ex-Amazon.com executive who thinks Amazon’s recommendations about what you might like based on an computer analysis don’t result in happy accidents and spontaneity?

          WTF?

          I suppose next he’s gonna tell me that all the groups I discovered, and never would have found on my own, on Pandora based on their computer analyzing my tastes, took the spontaneity and happy accidents out of it.

          Fucking clueless.

          1. They seem to be pretending that the opposite of what is true is true.

            I am only finding what I think I want.

          2. I can’t tell you the number of books and the range of subjects I have bought and read thanks to Amazon making suggestions. It is just rediculous.

            They don’t mean it. They are not concerned that people are not getting a diversity of things. They are just angry that people are reading what they want and they can’t control it.

            1. Indeed. The independent bookstores are just pissed they can’t stock the shelves with Marxist literature, and expect customers to clueless wander in and become new converts.

              1. “Oh, but the pleasure of wandering bookshelves!” surely beats paying 25% less for books that you can actually fucking find, instead of having to special order them and wait 3 weeks.

                Assholes.

          3. On Pandora, never venture far from Hometree or the Skypeople may get you.

          4. That is just the setup. The real thrust of the article is that Amazon is charging to little for books and therefore publishing houses are being forced to take large cuts in income if they want to be on Amazon. And that’s bad because the author and his cohort are writers who don’t get big advance checks any more. Now the authors of big blockbusters get all of the money, and authors of niche “high art” literature are getting squeezed (no more big advances that don’t pay off).

            To sum up: Market forces are bad, m’kay?

            1. too. dammit.

          5. That’s some hilariously stupid reasoning for sure….

            “Listen, you’re just a consumer. I’m and expert. You only think you know what you want… That’s because evil corporations out to make a profit have tricked you. It’s okay though, cause I can tell you what you really need.

            “What you need is to pay more money for the books that you want. You see, low prices only seem like they benefit you because, like I said, you’ve been tricked. But, now, because I’ve been nice enough to force you, errr I mean offer you the opportunity to pay higher prices, you can now not only pay for the books you want to read, but you can also directly subsidize the books you have no interest in, because WE think you should be reading them! See? Everyone wins!

            That is a special kind of narcissistic self serving retardo-logic.

            So, the audience for books has grown, book sales are up (Units not $$), more people are reading and everyone benefits; and these clowns think that’s a BAD idea…

            “Oh no! Publishers are having to discount their prices, and authors are having to discount their advances! The sky is falling!”

            When the discounts get too steep, the publishers will either stop making money, or wont be able to find talent to create the book. The marketplace will then adjust accordingly. Until then, the “Amazon” model works. It works for consumers, and producers.

            The only people it doesn’t work for are the elitist hippies who no longer get to exercise their “right” to tell you what to consume and think…

            1. The funniest part of it is that this is exactly the kind of bullshit that an evil corporation would WANT to sell you on. “No really! Paying more for randomly selected books, instead of getting exactly what you want is GOOD FOR YOU!”

              Which fits right in with my personal observation that left-liberals are the MOST gullible consumers out there. All the marketers have to do is sell it as edgey and “alternative” and they are like sheeps slobbering all over it. When in fact, it’s the most trendist, corporaste-hyped bullshit available. See the whole Apple cult.

              “Ohhh! Macs are so alternative! We’re standing up against The Man by buying them. down with the Mocrosoft corporate hierarchy. Steve Jobs is just like Hugo Chavez, a hero standing up for the people! I must buy 20 Ipads now!”

            2. The first part sounds suspiciously similar to the lines I fed women to get laid. (you don’t really want a rich good looking guy – you want a poor ugly small dicked guy…because it is virtuous!!!)
              Didn’t work than either.

        2. The point of it is to promote the one-toothpaste-for-everyone style of shopping available in a centralized economy.

          One of the obvious weaknesses of life in the USSR, and other socialist states, was the lack of selection available to the people. The left has spent the last several decades trying to explain why it’s a good thing to have no more than a couple of brands to choose from. Hen ce the “everyone would be happier with fewer choices!” meme.

          1. But if there were only a few brands, they’d complain about eeeevil corporations killing the competition and start shouting about monopolies, price gouging, consumer slavery, and anti-trust regulation. They can’t be happy, can they?

        3. They’re not just bothered by them reading more of the books they want, it’s also that they can get an unlimited selection so quickly, conveniently, and especially CHEAPLY!! It’s predatory price gouging I tells ya.

      2. “The loss of serendipity”

        I stopped after four words.

      3. The happy accident, the freakish discovery, ceases to exist. And that’s a problem.

        What?! So lack of access to information, and therefore a limited exposure to all books/music/movies/etc, leads to less discoveries? Does ex-Amazon editor James Marcus have mental retardation?

        Apparently, Charlie Winton, CEO of Counterpoint Press is also afflicted: “Shopping on Amazon is a directed experience?it works best when you know what you’re looking for. But how does that help with, for instance, a first novel? When independent bookstores were in a healthier state, staff picks and hand selling could bring attention to great books people didn’t know they wanted. Now that’s much harder.”

        So when Amazon sends me those emails that say “as someone who has purchased ________, you might also like _______,” that’s not similar to getting a staff pick?

        1. So yeah, what everyone else said.

    2. That article is complete garbage. Those people have no imagination and deny obvious facts.

      I use Amazon and a combination of Amazon and Wikipedia to do browsing and “discovery” of books and topics at a much more accelerated pace than in the past.

      Those two websites are the best thing for cross reference since card catalogs.

      I suspect these guys have an agenda besides their concern for the public.

      1. I believe it’s worse than that. There needs to be a name to describe people who, having succeeded in one area of life, such as, most typically, making a lot of money, suddenly decide this success makes them philosophers of some sort.

        They then commence to expound on their personal beliefs, perceptions and prejudices at great length and with utter confidence.
        My immediate thought was “moron”, but I doubt the academics will buy that. It needs to sound Greek or Latin, something old-timey.

        1. “My immediate thought was “moron”, but I doubt the academics will buy that. It needs to sound Greek or Latin, something old-timey.”

          Ignophile?

        2. It’s already there! That was Mencken’s definition, when he coined the word, of “intellectual” (as a noun) -a pejorative, of course: “a man who takes more words than necessary to tell more than he knows”

          (Often attributed to Eisenhower, but Ike was quoting Mencken).

          1. Every now and then you’ll read haters hating on Mencken for his hate feel screeds. Even though I am a member of several tribes he thouroughly bashed (Southerner, over macho Latin, bad speller to name a few), I enjoyed every word as if they came out of my own self loathing psyche. He had a gift for that.

            Then there is Florence King. I loved her essays in the National Review in the 90’s, and I bought a book hers for my wife of the time to read. Fortunately I read it before passing it along, and to my utter terror, shock and dismay it read as if King was on one woman jihad against anal sex. That book went straight into my locked stand up chest. If I had the power I would have deported the woman for being wrong for America and everything I believe in.

            Bad social critic! Bad social critic! No cookie for you!

      2. I suspect these guys have an agenda besides their concern for the public.

        They do. Their agenda is to justify the limited selection available in centralized economies. It’s a decades old meme. Go back 30 years and you’ll see the same people saying that having more than three brands of toothpaste is too confusing to people.

        1. I think you’re missing something. The Planners don’t really give that much of a damn if you’re happy in their planned economy. They count on pie in the sky bullshit promises to get you into it, and once you’re in it, they’ll have a gulag if you express too much discontent.

          But ask yourself this: if there is to be only ONE brand of toothpaste, instead of as many as there is a market for, or as many as people care to produce — WHO is going to choose which brand of toothpaste is the winner?

          Clearly we need experts, wise men, Planners, a politburo, professionals who will admonish us not to try this at home — and that, I think, is the agenda. To convince us of the need for far more central planning and decision makers than we’d naively thought was necessary.

        2. And the cognitive dissonance is amazing – these are the same assholes who support anti-trust like it was Holy Scripture.

          1. They aren’t really anti-trust. They are pro-trust as long as the monopoly in question is owned by “the people”.

    3. “The pleasure of browsing shelves stocked with care and intelligence by independent owners of stores like Midnight Special in Santa Monica, Cody’s in Berkeley and the Coliseum in Manhattan is only a memory”

      Is that not vomit inducing or what. What a crock. There are few people on earth snottier and more narrowminded than owners of independent bookstores. They never intelligently stocked anything in their lives.

      1. On Amazon I can browse fully nude or seductively draped in my boxers and T-shirt. Even with a twenty-one year old woman in my lap.

        I could never pull that off in a private bookstore or public library.

        1. nor in real life

          1. ya, before posting say this prayer aloud to yourself:

            I do my thing and you do your thing.

            I am not in this world to live up to your expectations,
            And you are not in this world to live up to mine.
            You are you, and I am I, and if by chance we find each other, it’s beautiful.
            If not, it can’t be helped.
            (Fritz Perls, 1969)

        2. Amazon sells twenty-one year old women who’ll sit in your lap? I guess it only makes sense. Can you supply a link? TIA.

          1. You have to find your own twenty-one year old, it’s easier than you think, or you could loosen up your requirements to skinny, medium sized boobs, and ideal waist to hip ratio without specifying age.

            BTW I was in boxers and T-shirt during all my posts for you doubters out there.

            1. can I get off your lap now?

              1. Unthinking Person’s Mommy, before posting say this prayer aloud to yourself:

                I do my thing and you do your thing.

                I am not in this world to live up to your expectations,
                And you are not in this world to live up to mine.
                You are you, and I am I, and if by chance we find each other, it’s beautiful.
                If not, it can’t be helped.
                (Fritz Perls, 1969)

                1. What part of I am fucking ignoring you don’t you get?

                  1. You have developed a childish attachment to me, or you would not answer my posts.

                    1. dream on

      2. A couple weekends ago I sat on my couch and started reading a few wikipedia articles, jumping through one haphazard link to another, browsing articles on topics from engineering to archeology to art history to everything else. 8 hours later I looked at my browser history: 600 wikipedia articles. I think its probably not an exaggeration to think having that resource available would make scholars from antiquity tremble and weep with joy. But then, even before that, I thought the writers at The Nation had shit for brains, so maybe it’s irrelevant. Also, I didn’t RTFA, and I’ve been drinking, and I don’t really know what I’m talking about, and I’m half watching “Its Me or the Dog” as I type. (On the Tivo, not live, so don’t bother running to the TV to catch it – it’s over. She got the owners to feed the dog at regular intervals and walk it daily – go figure. There, I just saved you 30 minutes, you’re welcome)In the show intro, she drives the same kind of jaguar as Austin Powers. Those Brits. Hello, how are you. I’m fine, thanks. How are you?

        1. “I didn’t RTFA, and I’ve been drinking, and I don’t really know what I’m talking about, and I’m half watching “Its Me or the Dog” as I type” That makes you the resident scholar 😉

        2. I love the chick on Its Me or the Dog. She as that total English Domiatrix vibe. She is not very pretty but still manages to be wildly sexy.

  7. I’ll gladly buy a drink for Stagliano if I ever see him. And continue to er, buy his movies.

    1. You actually pay for pr0n? Never heard of friktube or xvideos or siteslike?

      1. I’m staunchly anti-piracy.

        1. I’ve heard there is a massive amount of non-pirated free porn on the internet… not that I’d have reason to know… it’s probably just a rumor.

          1. Don’t get me wrong, were this free porn to exist, I would say I have, um partaken of it. Were it to exist.

            1. Voyeurweb, man. The free section is plenty raunchy for me, and I prefer amateur normal looking girls to professional models. The more average the appearance the better.

              Don’t get me wrong. My girlfriend is plenty hot, and has the tiniest booty that ever came out of Puerto Rico, but when she gets home from the hospital in an hour, the first thing she is going to do is take a massive dump while smoking a cigarette and drinking a beer, and then she is going to go to bed.

              So the romantic prospects are not quite up to Unthinking Person’s up there.

              1. Your girlfriend shits? Dump her.

              2. Sounds like a good plotline for one of Stag’s movies.

      2. Before making a decision to buy, make a little visit to this site.

        femjoy dot com/videos dot php

        1. If you’re going to join any sites, please join http://www.buttman.com/ (John’s site). He has plenty of legal bills (courtesy of the US Mafia — I mean DOJ), and as far as adult sites go, it’s one of the best (perhaps the best in the US).

          As for John, the victory couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy. I had the opportunity to interact with him quite a bit many years ago at a National LP convention in Chicago, and I was amazed at how truly nice he was.

          P.S. — John, if you read this, my apologies at criticizing your editing.

          1. Why not both?

            My comment was directed at those who never buy internet porn, even for a measly thirty bucks.

            This site proves that God is an Artist and that he loves me:
            http://femjoy.com/videos.php

  8. To celebrate, I will stop putting off getting a subscription to his site.

    I also plan to stick my tongue up the asshole of a twenty-one year old woman I know.

    As a subversive activity.

    1. +1
      good lord that’s funny.

    2. He won his case, so it’s not “subversive”, anymore. Bastards took the fun out of it.

  9. Is it possible The Big O told the prosecutors to tank it?

      1. Who knows, maybe he’s a fan?

    1. No, Oprah doesn’t like Buttman anymore.

  10. That judge was so stupid. He apparently knew Stagliano was guilty before the trial even started, so after things got underway and he realized the prosecution was fucking it up, he should have taken over the prosecuting the case himself. Oh well, live and learn, I suppose.

    1. This is what I don’t get. I mean the judge just about bent over backwards to help the prosecution, and they still f’up so badly he had to dismiss. The prosecution seemed to be full of true believers (“War on Porn”, “take back America for our children and families”, yada yada) but they couldn’t get their own evidence admitted or their stories straight. What gives? Is it that easy to be a gov’t lawyer? Did they suddenly lose interest?

      I’m happy with the result, but I am stunned that any lawyer could be this incompetent.

      1. Competence and nanny-statism rarely meet, and we should be thankful for that in this case. Most of the time we get our education system, bailed-out industries, Obamacare, etc. etc.

        When competence and nanny-statism do meet, prepare yourselves for anal probes or die.

      2. When the judge refused to let the jury see all the DVDs in their entirety, I thought perhaps she was deliberately attempting to generate grounds for appeal. “Taken as a whole” is a key phrase in the Miller test.

      3. When the judge refused to let the jury see all the DVDs in their entirety, I thought perhaps she was deliberately attempting to generate grounds for appeal. “Taken as a whole” is a key phrase in the Miller test.

        1. Heh-heh “Taken as a whole”

          1. That’s the HOLE point of Stagliano’s oeuvre.

            1. Hole jokes! Can I play?

              1. Hole jokes? Please leave me outa this.

      4. Remember, we’re talking guvment lawyers, not real lawyers.

  11. Finally, some good news. Its about time.

    Lou
    http://www.real-anonymity.net.tc

    1. It was so obvious that the charges should have been dismissed that even anonymity bot saw it.

    2. Well said, LouBot

    3. The bots now desire copulation with humans (or at least Buttman’s version of it)?

      They’re evolving.

  12. he is “doing things for good reasons”: money, and he’s a pig.

    1. On the commune, we have one guy doing our porn. Not because he loves it, but because the State assigned the task to him. It’s awful. Limp dicks and saggy cooches everywhere. And don’t even get me started about the lighting.

    2. In other news, providing people with a product they want is evil.

    3. Why is he a pig? Because he produces movies with paid actors and actresses that do some sexual things you don’t like? I have no interest in the milk squirtting stuff, myself, but don’t tell me there aren’t people out there who are into it…producing it and watching it. If it’s consenting adults, people aren’t being defrauded of contract, or held against their will, etc, tell me why it’s so offencive.

      1. You’re all full of shit.

        1. You’re a fascist piece of shit.

          1. Lord Ballsac,You’re a fucking creative genius and clever! Ubiquitous piece of shit.

            1. “So sweet” appears to be unintentional commentary on the irony of someone whose posts consist of “he’s a pig” and “you’re all full of shit” taking a shot at someone else over creativity and cleverness.

            2. Just call ’em as I see ’em Sweet. If you don’t like it, don’t watch it, tell your friends how much you hate it, and bitch about it on all the sexually-repressed forums you frequent, but the second you think that you have the right to point a gun at consenting adults and send them off to the clink, you have entered a realm of bullshit ruled by the hoary hosts of Hitler, Mao, and Stalin. It’s too bad your a small fish in that crowd.

        2. that’s what the whole “milk enema” thing is meant to cure. it’s medicine, and can be found on page 1172, paragraph 13, bullet 69 of the health care reform act.

      2. What

        you’re saying things that have no relation to each other

        “If my name is Timmy and I like lollipops, tell me why it’s not Saturday.”

        1. Let me make it simple for you:

          You’re a man, and ergo, full of shit. Does that clarify my position?

          1. Perfectly.
            You’re a hairy, man-hating dyke.

            1. No I’m shaved and I fuck men only

              1. So sweet, before posting say this prayer aloud to yourself:

                I do my thing and you do your thing.

                I am not in this world to live up to your expectations,
                And you are not in this world to live up to mine.
                You are you, and I am I, and if by chance we find each other, it’s beautiful.
                If not, it can’t be helped.
                (Fritz Perls, 1969)

              2. So sweet, aren’t you the female commentator who was electrocuted a few weeks ago when your lady butterfly hummer got snagged by your over saturated Depends? How is your pussy doing?

              3. You’re full of milk.

  13. I miss shrike and his inane ramblings about Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh.

    1. Shrike is kind of the Gollumn of Hit and Run only instead of saying “Precious” he says “Bushpig”.

      1. Funny you should mention that. I’ve always thought of you as the Samwise Gamgee of Hit & Run. PO-TA-TO!

        1. LOL. There are worse people to be.

    2. Is that some nickname for Chris Matthews?

    3. He was on Friday’s Limbaugh thread.

  14. I love pornography, too, John.

  15. Goddamn right. Now go film more whores getting ass fucked. The world could always use more of that.

  16. Congrats, John. Ridiculous and disconcerting.

    I hope he celebrates with a nice squirter tonight.

  17. Can one of the more lawyerly members of the Reason commentariet clarify whether this outcome allows the prosecutor to try again?

    1. Nope. Done and dusted. Once the prosecution calls its first witness, “jeopardy has attached” and if the prosecution loses, that’s it.

    2. FWIW, whether jeopardy attached is irrelevant, because I do not believe Mr. Stagliano is going to stop making these movies, so the prosecutors, should they be so inclined, can introduce a whole new set of obscenity charges.

  18. As a side comment, I note that I am the only one using my “real name”. I want to point out that I have defended porn publicly, on local TV, radio, and newspapers, and the response I have gotten was overwhelmingly positive. The only negative comments I’ve gotten were of the form “weren’t you scared?” and really pissing off the corrupt local sheriff (who saw attacking porn as a convenient way to get positive publicity to cover his misdeeds).

    Don’t be misled by the small local minority that wants to label you a “no good shit” (phrase courtesy of Robert Anton Wilson); the vast majority of Americans have either a positive or neutral opinion of porn — they’re just afraid to admit it publicly.

    That’s why these cases go forward.

    1. divorced;-)

      1. Nope; however, my girlfriend enjoys porn almost as much as I do. A woman who would divorce a man (or a man who would divorce a woman, for that matter) over porn is simply showing she didn’t really love him in the first place.

    2. Pornographers do a wonderful, heart-warming thing: make people happy, including some very lonely people. It’s hard to think of a nicer favor to do for people.

  19. The Obscenity Prosecution Task Force should be abolished.

    1. Well, I’m sure that Obama will get to that once he’s done putting an end to marijuana raids.

      1. In fairness to Obama, there really are fewer marijuana raids than the Bush administration was pursuing.

        1. I suppose that depends on where you live.

  20. Who’d a thunk it, the courts did something right!

  21. Hey, a good news post to start the weekend!

    (This can only mean Balko has a real nut kicker on deck 🙂

  22. This great news inspired me to go watch “Field of Cream” and “Hairy Twatter and the Sorcerer’s Bone”. Fine day for freedom!

  23. I raise a double shot of Jager to professional pornography, lube, and wi-fi! Woohoo!

  24. Time to blow Stagliano!

  25. Buttman Spared Getting Reemed By DOJ.

    Talk about a missed opportunity for a headline.

  26. And thank you, Reason, for “workmanlike coverage” of this farce.

  27. They’ll be back for him again, on some other pretense. Count on it.

    1. we’ll get to hear about your imaginary pron stories

  28. You would not exactly expect someone who has run / runs Vegas shows that are supposed to have some cultural value to get nailed for obscenity.

    Should have probably went after an easier target (again).

  29. Now may i stop hearing about this CAFONE?

    1. He gives money to Reason. So you could say that they are part of his stable.

    2. He’s like Shakespeare, only with disgusting perversions.

  30. Wow thats totally funny dude.

    Lou
    http://www.real-anonymity.net.tc

    1. You must be the slow bot. The Nation is down the hall to the left, sweetie.

  31. just beacuse we love christian louboutin,also we think it will made you be more sexy.IN christian louboutin sale,you can get your luxury christian louboutin shoes at cheap price.christian louboutin shoes(born 1964) is a footwear designer who launched his line of high-end women’s shoes in France in 1991.trademark protection of this red sole design.cheap christian louboutin shoes

  32. The day he wore a suit, left chest, wearing a pink flower, next to the bride wore a white dress, Lisa brings flowers, face smile, still able to see the links of london ring, and Daniel Wu look .links of london sale satisfied, for her to wear the ring, it is true marriage, Daniel tribes blew, he became a married links of london jewellery man, and then set foot on Hong Kong Film Awards red carpet, it immediately became the focus.

  33. Hong Kong star Daniel Wu this 2 days active in the blog wedding news release, the girlfriend of 8 years with the love Lisa, married in South Africa earlier this month has been, and still held a forest wedding, ownership of natural, simple and grand; as links of london ring, on links of london behalf of marriage knot hair. Married status in the open after the first public forum this evening to participate in Hong Kong Film Awards, the Avenue of Stars on the red carpet, generous showed links off his left hand the ring, he said, feeling no different after marriage, but left a little heavier . But his hands wearing the same links of lonson ring, he said, links of london ring is a token of their love.Although not expensive, but it looks clever design, elegant, simple, and this links of london rings engraved with their names.

  34. J. Edgar is turning over in his grave, he knew the value of gunning them down versus a trial.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.