18-Year-Old Faces Possible 70 Years in Federal Prison for Snapchat Sexting Crime
"I'm not saying my kid should get nothing," says Eric Beyer Jr.'s mother. "But to take an 18-year-old kid and put him in jail for longer than he's been alive?"
Let's say you're a 17-year-old boy asking two 16-year-old girls to sext you on Snapchat—well, that's pretty normal these days, right? Let's agree that it is.
Now, let's say that you possibly paid the girls for their sexts, and then allegedly threatened to expose them unless they sent more of them. That's not normal. It's obviously immoral, probably illegal, and quite simply wrong.
But are you knowingly creating child pornography and transmitting it across state lines?
That's what Eric Beyer Jr., of Hutchinson, Kansas, is accused of. He faces up to 70 years in federal prison.
"I'm not saying that I don't think my son should be punished for that," says Jessica Meloney, Beyer's mother. "Absolutely, he should know what he did was wrong and should get in trouble. I'm not saying my kid should get nothing. Even if you want to give him five years, I'm okay with that, because I know he'll never do it again. But to take an 18-year-old kid and put him in jail for longer than he's been alive?"
When Beyer was 17, he made a fake account on Snapchat and started contacting girls about his same age. He was in high school at the time. The FBI became aware of his activity in June of 2021, probably because one of the girl's parents found out what he was doing and brought her phone to the authorities. But the FBI waited until September, a month after Beyer turned 18, to act.
Then, at about 4:30 a.m., a SWAT team raided the house where Beyer lived with his dad and brother, and handcuffed all three, according to his mother, who is divorced and lives in Pennsylvania. Then they put Beyer in the cruiser for questioning. He was read his Miranda rights and responded, "I understand."
When questioned, Beyer said that yes, the Snapchat account was his, and no, he wasn't sharing it with anyone. He asked if his father could be there with him, but the agents said he was old enough to be alone. Then they told him, "We need your password." Unaware that he could refuse, Beyer gave it to them, whereupon they opened his account and put him under arrest, according to his mother.
Beyer has been in jail awaiting trial ever since. His family could not afford the $5,000 it would take to bail him out, and by the time they got the money together, it was too close to his trial date—which has been moved several times—to release him.
How is it that photos exchanged—or even extorted—by teens who all reside in Kansas can be considered an interstate crime? Simple: Snapchat's server is in California. The images electronically left Kansas, crossed state lines, and came right back.
Nonetheless, the authorities had a choice: They could have brought district charges against him, or federal ones.
"When there's a case with overlapping interests, a lot of times the federal and the state prosecutor have a conversation about who is going to do the case," says Troy Stabenow, a federal assistant defense attorney. Who takes the case could be based on something as simple as who has more time on their schedule, or who thinks they would get the most appropriate punishment.
It's not clear why Beyer's case went to the U.S. Attorney.* The prosecutor, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason Hart, did not respond to a request for comment.
Kansas City-based criminal defense attorney Chris Angles says the federal statute can result in extremely heavy consequences, regardless of offender age.
"These crimes are unfortunately increasingly common among teens," says Angles. "State laws, unlike federal ones, are crafted to address age and other mitigating factors. Applying the federal law in this case, with the facts as we understand them, seems overly punitive."
In fact, the attorney continued, under Kansas law, there aren't even mandatory minimums.
"A state prosecutor could exercise discretion and the sentence could be tailored to the facts of the case, with a judge having discretion to depart," says Angles. "His likely starting range under Kansas law would be 4-20 years." A plea, he indicated, would probably be lower.
Beyer's federal charges—two counts of knowingly producing and transporting child pornography and one of possessing it—carry far lengthier sentences. Each production charge is punishable by not less than 15 nor more than 30 years. The possession charge is 10 years.
These sentences could be served concurrently, but Melone says her son's public defender has warned Beyer that they could also be "stacked"; in other words, he might have to serve them one after another. In that case, if convicted of all three charges, he would be facing a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 70 years behind bars. He'd get out at age 58 or age 88.
It's worth noting that each year of incarceration costs taxpayers roughly $40,000.
Beyer's public defender had recommended he take a plea deal that would cap his incarceration at 20 years and perhaps get him 12 to 15 years in prison, followed by registration as a sex offender.
Recently, Beyer received some good news. He sent a note to the judge pointing out that he was just a month away from his September 27 trial date and still did not know how his public defender planned to argue the case. This moved the judge to dismiss the public defender and allow a pro bono lawyer to take over. Now his trial has been pushed back indefinitely.
This development gives Melone a ray of hope. It's possible that Beyer might even be allowed to come home before his trial now.
It does sound like Beyer probably committed a crime—one all too easy to commit in this technological age, but one that warrants punishment, nevertheless. Those 16-year-old girls—indeed, all minors—obviously deserve protection from exploitation, and blackmail is a serious issue.
But it also sounds like the relevant laws, which cover interstate production and transmission of illegal images, were written for the era before the internet, when data didn't fly through the air. These laws do not map directly onto the dismaying conduct of teens, other teens, and smart phones. A young man who solicits nude photos from young women and then threatens to expose them has done something wrong; he needs to make amends and be taught better behavior. But does he really need to spend the rest of his life in prison?
"I have a three-year-old," says Melone. "If my three-year-old takes a magic marker and draws all over my walls and I beat him half to death, the punishment doesn't fit the crime."
*CORRECTION: The original version of this piece misstated the office for which Jason Hart works.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The more punishment that we mete out, the more justice that there is!
(So say evil assholes and power pigs.)
Best Fairtex Boxing Gloves use it for training and fighting purposes as well. it has a high demand in the market that enables it to stand in the market. You can get it from the market and order online as well.
The creativity begins with Fairtex, which allows you to select a unique design. You can choose a model that reflects your personality. There are only a limited pair of gloves with extra features and colors.
Regards: Best celeto reyes boxing gloves
Meanwhile:
“Durham Inquiry Appears to Wind Down as Grand Jury Expires
The special counsel appointed by the Trump administration to examine the Russia investigation seems to be wrapping up its work with no further charges in store….”
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/14/us/politics/durham-inquiry-trump-russia.html
“But are you knowingly creating child pornography and transmitting it across state lines?”
Yes. How is this even a question?
There’s a difference between teens sexting and teens *fucking coercing each other*.
Still, 70 years at that age
Yup. That was clearly what he was doing. And that’s why he should take a plea deal. We should talk about whether the minimum sentence in this case is overly harsh, but this kid created child pornography and possessed it over the internet, where state lines don’t really exist. Because if something is on the internet, it’s not on the internet in a single state.
We can argue against sentencing laws without pretending this kid isn’t a horrific asshole.
The girls also produced child pornography and distributed it to a minor….
This.
Punish the girls, too, in the “interest of justice.”
“We should talk about whether the minimum sentence in this case is overly harsh, but this kid created child pornography and possessed it over the internet, where state lines don’t really exist.”
The conjunction “but” is what is wrong with this sentence. The fact that state lines don’t really exist on the internet is exactly why not just the sentence but the federal laws themselves are wrong.
“We can argue against sentencing laws without pretending this kid isn’t a horrific asshole.”
I wouldn’t want the worst thing I did when I was 17-ish to be federally prosecuted, and I suspect you wouldn’t either, whether you want to admit it or not.
I don’t think anyone is saying it isn’t wrong, but the level of wrongness doesn’t match the punishment at all. He could have raped and murdered both girls and gotten out in less time than that.
Also, extorting sex pics from anyone, regardless of their age, is wrong. You should go to jail for that. Extorting sex pics from kids is also bad. You should go to extra jail for that too. But sex stuff with kids is bad because of power imbalances. Kids doing it to other kids their own age isn’t so much of an imbalance. Pretending a teenager extorting teenagers for sex pics is exactly the same as a middle aged man photographing toddlers to sell pictures on the internet isn’t doing justice, it’s padding statistics.
But sex stuff with kids is bad because of power imbalances. Kids doing it to other kids their own age isn’t so much of an imbalance.
I think it’s bad beyond just the power imbalance, it’s the added vulnerability of young people. That’s why extorting them with his already existing pictures is so effective, it isolates the girls in their vulnerability. They have limited freedom so they’re trapped in schools and settings they can’t just opt out of.
I don’t think 16 year olds should be swapping nudes, but if it’s done consensually, that’s their business. When you add in the coercive element to it, it becomes gross, and yes, this person created child porn because he made them pose for pictures they otherwise would not have.
I still think this is a significant felony deserving of significant time. The issue seems to be the mandatory minimum. I don’t think there’s any way this would actually end up with consecutive sentencing so the 70 years isn’t in play even slightly (making the headline and most of the story pure pearl-clutching hyperbole), but the issue is that the 20 year minimum he’d serve with a guilty plea is still too long.
I don’t think there’s any way this would actually end up with consecutive sentencing so the 70 years isn’t in play even slightly
If it’s legally possible, however unlikely, then it’s in play and part of the threat to coerce the defendant to accept a plea deal. This is part of a standard playbook that prosecutors use: Threaten to throw the book at someone, then offer a plea deal with a reasonable or even light punishment. I have no idea on the facts of this case, whether Beyer has a ghost of chance in court or if he’s red-handed guilty, but he has a right to a trial by a jury of his peers. I don’t think that right can be considered fully intact if he faces a punishment ten times (or more) worse for exercising it.
“Threaten to throw the book at someone, then offer a plea deal with a reasonable or even light punishment.”
Much more common, and what’s occurring here, is “Threaten an insane punishment, then offer a plea deal with only a very harsh punishment.”
There is no ghost of a chance in court aside from jury nullification. He asked for nude photographs of girls under 18 and received them. It doesn’t matter if he was six. Just receiving those photographs was a federal a crime by definition.
So is producing and transmitting
He received and apparently requested nudie photos. The girls took the nudie photos and sent them. Tell me again who was producing and distributing “child pornograph”, and how his crime is worse than theirs.
If there were ever a place for jury nullification, this is it. If you are of age to serve on a jury don’t post about it or admit to knowing much about it, and deny you would ever do it during jury selection. Lie like a rug, then have the good sense to keep your mouth shut and your key board quiet about having done it – or a vindictive prosecutor will very likely try to prosecute you.
How you just described coercion sounds like the extortion the prosecutors are using to get this teen to accept a plea deal.
I’m completely in Beyer’s camp and think he should get time served and probation. But I can’t get on board with the “power imbalances” catchphrase; in the first place, that manner of analysis is straight out of neo-Marxism; and more importantly, in the case we’re talking about it’s simply absurd. A teenager who has sex or does any sexual things with an adult (unless they are a cop or parent, etc.) has all the power in the situation and they know it. And how they know it!
Some of the J6 protestors were facing close to 50 years. Reason had no articles on the maximum federal sentence. Because those sentences are rarely given out. This kid won’t actually face 70 years. This is outrage narrative that is not given for other crimes. Oddly they choose child porn to shout their outrage.
Trying to steal our democracy is a VERY serious offense! Message sent… Message received yet?
Trying to violently overthrow the government is a lot worse than sexting.
The J6 group was trying to violently overthrow the government with no guns or bombs?
You are a fucking chump.
READ the below and hang your tiny brainless, power-lusting shit-head in SHAME for always taking the side of Trumpanzees, power-luster-pig!
https://www.jpost.com/international/kill-him-with-his-own-gun-dc-cop-talks-about-the-riot-655709 also https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/04/28/michael-fanone-trump-gop-riots/
‘Kill him with his own gun’ – DC cop talks about Capitol riot
DC Police officer Michael Fanone: I had a choice to make: Use deadly force, which would likely result with the mob ending his life, or trying something else.
“Pro-law-and-order” Trumpturds take the side of trumpanzees going apeshit, making cops beg for their lives! For trying to defend democracy against mobocracy! Can you slime-wads sink ANY lower?!?!
Well, rather punish the lawbreakers, instead of having them grab your gun, so that they can “kill you with your own gun”!
What happened to the “back the blue” and “lawn odor” wings of “Team R” anyway?
PS, mob violence and mob property destruction are both always wrong… Except when MY Tribe does it! Think Boston Tea Party!
Me? Given my druthers, I’d rather have the thugs steal my TV and my expensive sneakers, than steal my democracy! My TV can be easily replaced! Democracy? Not so sure about THAT one!
Well, also Saint Babbitt was unarmed, they say… To this I say…
What utter bullshit! A lion, tiger, or bear charges you, having NO weapons other than their body parts… Just as “un-armed” as Saint Babbitt… Are you, or are you NOT gonna shoot said predator, if you have a gun? If I beat the shit out of you, with my fists, shall I be forgiven, ’cause I was… unarmed?
My GAWD you (Saint Babbitt Worshitters) fascists are illogical!!!
“The J6 group was trying to violently overthrow the government with no guns or bombs?”
Yep. Says something about their IQ, but yep.
So when the J6 protesters entering the Rotunda were trying to overthrow the government, the protesters on SCOTUS lawns were what? trying to give them a warm welcome? When one showed up with a rifle and a side arm, he was just exercising free speech and the 2A? When the ‘Summer of Love’ turned into the Year of Destruction, what were they trying to accomplish? Viewpoints are fine, but don’t act as though they are definitive.
Back to this case, any competent attorney would do at least discovery to see the prosecutors evidence and theory of the case before entertaining a plea deal. Just sayin’.
They should have had articles about that. That’s also wrong (the excessive sentences and the failure to comment).
No, the section of the article I quoted is treating this like it’s consensual teen sexting.
It’s not. It’s coercion and that, IMO, is what takes it out of the realm of innocent teen sexuality and into the real of producing child pornography.
Yes, 70 years is harsh – but again, these authors use maximum possible sentence’ to shock you. Kid’s not getting 70 years. We could probably – like the author could – look up the sentencing guidelines and get the actual likely sentence.
But that would be actual reporting.
Coercion it certainly seems to be. And a shitty bit of behavior from a possibly shitty person. But that doesn’t magically make possession or the request for the images ‘production of’ cp. If there’s going to be a cp charge, perhaps we should find out who it was that suggested $ for the sexts, who initiated the conversation, who started the sexual portion? What this story managed to miss, and some key facts relevant to the individual liberties point of view. At the time of the alleged crime, Beyer was 17, it appears that the alleged victims were older than 16, the age of consent in Kansas. Other than the ridiculous ‘across state lines’ charge, there is no reason for this to be in the hands of any federal agency -it is a local law enforcement matter.
The age of consent has nothing to do with the definition of child pornography. Inexplicably, two people can be old enough to have sex with each other, but if they take pictures of themselves while they do it they are child pornographers.
I would wager that half the public does not know that Snapchat transmissions cross state lines.
I would also love to know what the moral or consequential difference is between transmissions that cross state lines and transmissions that do not, that would justify the existence of the pertinent federal law.
Knowingly transmitting it across state lines?
No. Most people don’t know (or care) where a company’s servers are. They think they are communicating with the person next-door. The “across state lines” test is badly out of date for modern communications.
Knowingly creating child pornography?
Again, no, though this may be closer. Minors taking pictures of themselves and sharing the pictures with other minors is immature and potentially harmful but not to the extent that our current child pornography laws assume. The analogy is the “Romeo and Juliet” exception to statutory rape laws. Unfortunately, minors can have actual sex but no such exception exists for mere pictures.
“Coercing each other” certainly is and should be punishable. That doesn’t mean it’s automatically the federal crime of child pornography.
>The “across state lines” test is badly out of date for modern communications.
I always thought the across state lines test was to allow the federal law enforcement to be involved. Like FBI and Postal inspectors. Since the post is across state lines there’s jurisdiction for federal laws. If a minor is transported across state lines then they exceed local jurisdiction but the feds can take over. Things like that.
You’re completely correct that It means jack shit for something like sexting with a girl you met in class. There’s plenty unpleasant here, but nothing state lines related.
There are lots of options for prosecuting the extortion aspect without the absurdity of calling it “child pornography” and reacting in the usual mindless, pearl-clutching manner. That is strictly manipulation of the system and the emotions of the public.
and:
“Russia spent millions on secret global political campaign, U.S. intelligence finds
Russia has secretly funneled at least $300 million to foreign political parties and candidates in more than two dozen countries since 2014 in an attempt to shape political events beyond its borders, according to a new U.S. intelligence review….
….the administration decided to declassify some of the review’s findings in an attempt to counter Russia’s ability to sway political systems in countries in Europe, Africa and elsewhere.
“By shining this light on Russian covert political financing and Russian attempts to undermine democratic processes, we’re putting these foreign parties and candidates on notice that if they accept Russian money secretly we can and we will expose it,” the official said.
The senior official said the U.S. government detected an uptick in Russian covert political financing in 2014. The review did not address Russian activities within the United States.
Assessments by both U.S. spy agencies and a bipartisan Senate investigation concluded that Russia under President Vladimir Putin launched a campaign to interfere in the 2016 presidential election to assist then-candidate Donald Trump….”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/09/13/united-states-russia-political-campaign/
“ The final price tag for the 2016 election is in: $6.5 billion for the presidential and congressional elections combined, according to campaign finance watchdog OpenSecrets.org.”
I’m sure the $12.5 million the Russians spent made a huge impression.
Assange, the Putin stooge, didn’t cost much, nor the GRU hackers who stole the emails, and Roger Stone was paid by Trump. Keeoing Manafort quiet was similarly a Trump expense, not Russian.
Hillary and the DoJ both paid Russians for the steele dossier information used for FISA warrants.
They paid Fusion GPS.
Trump didn’t pay the Russians anything. They gave it to him for future considerations.
Impressive, but still not dumber than shrike.
How many governments has the US just flat out murdered?
How many coups have we funded?
How many elections have we meddled in?
And you’re crying foul when the Russians put a few hundred million into a multi-hundred billion set of campaigns?
How’s the weather in Moscow Agammamon.
Of course Russia has “murdered” scores of governments and millions of people and meddled in ours in 2016 for the benefit of Trump as reported in the GOP led Senate Intel Comm Report of Aug 2020.
But the FBI waited until September, a month after Beyer turned 18, to act.
That’s how imperative the feds regarded it.
I’m not a lawyer, but if he didn’t actually commit the crimes before he turned 18, shouldn’t he have been charged as a juvenile and the case thrown out?
Yes, that’s just one of the things that’s wrong with this case. The other is that they had months in which they could’ve simply told him to stop. But they went the “human sacrifice” route instead. Shades of Waco.
Surprising that the feds didn’t also turn out to be the “young girls” he was extorting.
Give it time.
Hate to say if, but If he were gay/trans and the photos were of boys, there wouldn’t be a case.
Next time you have a thought…let it go.
He should get time served and probation. The only thing he did wrong was the extortion, and that could’ve been charged under something like “malicious use of a communications device” or whatever the Kansas equivalent is.
Calling it “child pornography” is just a way to stir up the emotions of the less informed segment of the public. Unethical politicians get votes that way and unethical media get ratings that way. It’s human sacrifice, 21st Century style.
these laws should have clauses that say something like they don’t apply (at least the child pornography aspects) if victim and defendant are within 2-3 years of age.
i don’t need my government using child pornography laws against high school seniors mixed up with high school sophomores.
There’s no Romeo and Juliet clause to sexual assault, stalking, harassment, etc in Kansas. What you’re describing does not apply there, though it does make some sense. That said, all parties were juveniles and appear to be over age of consent.
They willingly gave them before he used those photos to coerce them further.
I assume you have a young daughter
In this case, the teen sexting law does do that. In that aspect it would be a very minor offense in Kansas.
Would have done better going to D.C. and killing a couple of people. Since he’s under 25, he’d get lenient sentencing since his brain isn’t fully formed yet Maybe not, if he’s White, though).
if he rapes one of them he gets 12 and if he murders one life w/likely possibility of parole. if in Illinois he’d be out w/o bail
federal sentencing is ridiculous.
Has the FBI ever done anything of real value ? I submit the answer could be no
I might golf clap if we found out there were real x-files
Okay, he’s a scum bag. But why isn’t he being tried for when the crime was committed, ie under the age of 18, instead of them waiting to do it after his 18th birthday ? That seems sus. What are the rules for that sort of thing ?
The rules are “fuck you, that’s why”
The rule is fuck you because anyone who defends this moron is automatically a pedophile, that’s why.
Like guy above comparing it to rape. And way above someone doing exactly what I describe. Emotions over logic.
Idiot alert!!
He still had it on his phone when he was arrested (at 18 and one month) and allowed the cops to see it, ergo an adult child pornographer.
If they are old enough to breed, they are not really “children”.
May I suggest that the new language re-write include this:
0 – 2 years, infant
3 – 12 years, child
13 – 17, teenager
18 – up, adult
18 – 26 mandated leech on parents’ health insurance
?? – 50? thief of tuition payments.
followed by registration as a sex offender.
So a life sentence then.
This is horrible! My son is in a similar situation. He was sentenced to 27 years. The laws are so old and need updated! This is cruel and unusual punishment! The government is SO Slow catching up with the times. This could be unconstitutional! The sex registry is a joke! It has not helped anyone. It’s a complete waist of money. The government is trying to ruin our boys. They waited until he turned 18? This needs brought up in court! The government and ALL of their “agents” are dirty! The FBI can lie to our children to get a confession, but if our children lie to them it’s obstruction. Double standard much??? That’s a rhetorical question we know they have double standards!
I am trying to wrap my head around all of this.
We are now saying that a 14yo girl is mature and old enough to make decisions concerning her body, without the interference from adults, such as having sex, obtaining an abortion, changing their gender, identifying as a . . . .whatever.
Yet, here we are, saying these 16-17 year old girls, who initially sent nude photographs to another 17 year old boy, are innocent victims. Doesn’t make sense.
IF it can be shown that the Feds PURPOSELY WAITED until the minor became an adult then the FEDS HAVE NO RIGHT OR AUTHORITY to prosecute this MINOR. It was THEIR ARROGANCE AND VIOLATIONS that PERMITTED THIS CRIME TO CONTINUE and as such should be SUED!
Second, whatever the charges are for this for a MINOR in regards to intimidation, coercion as well as extortion and depending on what he did with those photos could add to the charges as a MINOR.
Also, he should be put on the sex offenders list until he is 30 for even acting in such a lewd and lascivious way to have a girl send him pictures. But the FEDS AND OUT OF LUCK FOR TRYING TO BE TRICKY AND DEMONIC IN THEIR TACTICS!
The obtained the warrant on his 18th birthday.
That’s exactly what they did do and it’s known they did do. They had weeks to warn him he was going to cross a legal line if they were so terribly concerned about the victims in the case. They were not concerned about that, because their mission is to harm, not to help.
Law enforcement is so imbued with self-righteousness that they will allow or even solicit a greater crime.
In Michigan if you commit ???????????????????????????????????????????????? and are a first offender with no enhancements, the sentence guideline is 11 months.
Beyer has already served 11 months and 21 days. They need to let it drop already.
Then, at about 4:30 a.m., a SWAT team raided the house where Beyer lived with his dad and brother, and handcuffed all three, according to his mother, who is divorced and lives in Pennsylvania.
Was this really necessary?!? Seriously – this was asinine! It’s also how shootings occur and people die – though rarely the over zealous fools with the badges! You come busting through my door at 430AM you’re likely to be met with bullets! and for what!? Sexting? Good grief this is crazy!
Yeah I agree, 70 years is waaay too much. I think 65 years would be far more appropriate. – If your mom isn’t aware and approve of what you’re doing you probably should be doing it.
OK, Goldilicks GorillaShit! Go punish yourself PLEASE… It will create more justice for ALL of us!!!
(Suggested punishment: Go cold turkey on that gorilla-shit for at least a week! I bet you can’t do it!)
I am making 80 US dollars per hr. to complete some internet services from home. I have not ever thought like it would even achievable however my confidant mate got $13k only in four weeks easily doing this best assignment and also she convinced me to avail. Look extra details
going this article… https://libertyinc0me.neocities.org/
What an insightful article! It poignantly illustrates how a 17 y.o. “child” who is thought to be the victim of a sex crime or manipulation, is afforded virtually unlimited protection and is never considered responsible for their actions. However, a 17 y.o. thought to be the perpetrator of a sex offense is afforded no protection and treated like an adult who has premeditated their offense in an evil manner and is deserving of no mitigation considerations.
I am happy for your success in your new internet veture. Do you shave your pubes before your webcam show or do it on camera, or do you just “go furry”?