Skip to content

Did Pageant Officials Distribute Child Pornography to Smear Carrie Prejean?

November 12, 2009

It looks like the leftist partisans who violated Joe the Plumber’s privacy, rifled through Linda Tripp’s confidential records, and spent weeks literally navel-gazing at Bristol Palin’s real and imagined pregnancies have hit a new low: leaking an underage pornographic video to smear Carrie Prejean.

By now, the media have ensured millions of people who never learned the names of Van Jones, Valerie Jarrett, or Anita Dunn have heard that the former Miss California once made a solo sex tape — or, as the seasoned gatekeepers of reliable journalism often report it, simply a “sex tape.” Prejean told Sean Hannity this week that she made the video for an old boyfriend; other news outlets have reported she filmed herself five years ago, when she was 17. If accurate, that makes the tape child pornography under California law.

The video came to light after the Miss California pageant’s lawyers showed some of the tape in court, causing Prejean to drop her lawsuit against the contest in “about fifteen seconds.” But the court attendees — including Prejean’s mother — were not the first to see the film since the break-up. The celebrity gossip website TMZ has announced it “obtained the video months ago.” Which raises the question: how and from whom was the film”obtained”? In this case, it seems prudent to ask the Latin question, Cui bono — who benefits? The beauty contest’s lawyers, who took Prejean’s crown under questionable circumstances, were locked in a bitter legal battle with a sympathetic defendant. Did pageant officials leak child pornography to the media in an effort to destroy a legal adversary?

Prejean sued the pageant in late August. If the lawyers sent a copy of the allegedly illegal tape to TMZ in September, that would qualify as “months ago.”

E! News added another wrinkle last week, noting that unnamed “peddlers” offered the video as an “exclusive” months ago for $10,000 — and even pornographic websites would not touch it. Nik Richie of told E, “our lawyers wouldn’t let us put it on the site.”

If any cash changed hands in any of the various transactions leading from the boyfriend to the barristers, that would constitute trafficking in child pornography.

Even playing those fleeting seconds of the tape in court may grounds for prosecution. Douglas A. Berman, professor of law at The Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law, has concluded:

[W]ere Prejean to convince federal officials to seek to prosecute some of the folks who have viewed and distributed her “child porn” sex tape, she might be able to seek significant restitution as the victim of these child porn offenses.

The distribution chain begins with the boyfriend — but if he is like most teenage boys, he probably passed off duplicated copies to his 20 closest friends within an hour, a pointed lesson for teens about the perils of sexting. Any of its recipient may have approached the Miss California USA pageant or these websites — or the pageant may have subsequently contacted the websites.

The question remains: Did someone sink to the most revolting of crimes to smear a Christian advocate of traditional marriage? Doing so would be entirely consistent with the Left’s philosophy — both of sexual libertinism and of personal destruction.

If Carrie was indeed 17 at the time, all parties should be investigated and, if grounds exist, prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

  1. KevinNYC permalink
    November 12, 2009 5:57 am

    You could also ask the question, “Did Carrie Prejean distribute child pornography?” There have a been a few cases around the country where girls have been prosecuted for what she has done.

    However, the latest development in this case, is that the boyfriend talked to the website and said what she told Sean Hannity wasn’t true. He claims he didn’t know her until two years ago when Prejean was 20 years old. He also claims that she recently called him and tried to get him to lie and say she was 17 at the time. I assume to prevent release of the video. He also says she sent him multiple videos.

    I guess we’ll have to see who is telling the truth.

    • November 12, 2009 6:52 am

      As you say, we’ll see when it was taken. But smearing their opponents is the only way the Left argues — because its behavior is indefensible.

      • John Davidson permalink
        November 12, 2009 7:22 am

        It has been the lefts tactic for as I have been working and I’ve dealt with it for 50 years. I’ve had enough!

        • brian permalink
          November 12, 2009 11:27 am

          Priceless, It must of been a left wing conspiracy that drove this moral woman to pose for nude pictures, and masturbation videos (years before anyone knew who she was), then they contacted the owners of these materials and convinced them (even thought no one knew they existed) to sell them to national media for their own financial benefit….because this Left Wing conspiracy knew years in advance that the right wing would embrace her anti-gay stance and make her a role model for their children….makes perfect sense.

  2. The Center Square permalink
    November 12, 2009 5:58 am

    Hey, she’s the one who sued the California pageant. You climb into the ring, you better be ready to punch and get punched. What’s wrong with the pageant’s attorneys obtaining the information they need to defend their client?

    • November 12, 2009 6:52 am

      If that involves underage pornography, yes.

    • John Davidson permalink
      November 12, 2009 7:33 am

      The problem with Attorney is they are inclined to frabricate evidence with no regard to the ethical issues they are suppose to abide by. They have made a mockery of the justice system very deviously. The issue is that those that promoted the pageant willfully sponsored the woman and paid for the bbob job, but when she made a statement upon winning a rigged contest, she was ostracized. Joe the Plumber knows how that works, Sarah Palin knows how that works. Most of us contribiting to this NewsReal knows how that works.

  3. Mary permalink
    November 12, 2009 6:07 am

    This is what Christians call a good role-model for young women? LOL
    She is not only a hypocrite, but a liar. The person she sent sex videos to says she was 20 at the time – not 17!

    • John Davidson permalink
      November 12, 2009 7:34 am

      Single out a group, Mary and judge not the real issue here.

    • themadjewess permalink
      November 12, 2009 7:55 am

      ‘This is what Christians call a good role-model for young women? LOL
      She is not only a hypocrite, but a liar. The person she sent sex videos to says she was 20 at the time – not 17!’

      Mary…Mary…She was * brainwashed * in Marxist ‘education’ , where sex is taught, in 5th grade. She is not above reproach, no, but by her religion, if she asked to be forgiven, she is. WHERE ARE THE CHRISTIANS FOR THIS GIRL?!?

      You can’t see that this is just an attempt to totally ruin this young ladies life. All people do wrong.

      She is now in the fire, and even you- a ‘female’ can’t come out to bat for her, Mary? I certainly hope that you are not a feminist, if you are, this poor girl is SCREWED.

      I believe that serious militant people that are gay must be ‘lol’
      IS ANYONE going to come to the defense of this poor girl, or get off the ivory tower to forgive and forget?

      MY G-D, I am losing HOPE everyday.

      • Mike permalink
        November 12, 2009 8:46 am

        As Martin Luther King Jr once said, “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”

        They hung Carrie out to dry …

        • themadjewess permalink
          November 12, 2009 10:27 am

          Mike, he said it great, ty.

          Where are the Christians to come out to bat for this young lady, she is only 22!! 22! When I was 22, I would have had a nervous breakdown if all of this was slammed on me.

          I PRAY for this young woman, the left is so satanic: Alinsky rule 13: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it, attack the person, cut it off and leave it without sympathy.

    • Mik permalink
      November 13, 2009 5:06 am


      Of course the tape is not what one would use as a role model, but your comment and many of the others on this board reflect a lack of understanding about what being a Christian is. Christianity requires more than a a birth certificate. It involves a personal decision and the faith can be accepted or rejected. Growing up in a Christian home no more makes a person a Christian than living in a garage makes a person a car. Sure the influence is there, but the choice is personal. In that sense God has no grandchildren. Mom and Dad’s faith does not count for me.

      So as a younger person Carrie made all sorts of decisions. Some good and some bad. At another point in her life she decided to follow Jesus. It is a new beginning. It does not erase the consequences of her prior actions, but it does allow her to get on with life. However, the left, which cannot find grace for anyone who is not of their kind, immediately cries – hypocrisy. Well duh! Who is not a hypocrite? The only way not to be a hypocrite is to have standards so low that it is impossible not to keep them. So in other words, be as immoral as you can be. For this way of thinking sin is assuming that there is any level of prescribed standard of behavior. We are reaping the consequences daily.

  4. Nellie permalink
    November 12, 2009 6:25 am

    Precisely why Obama’s records should all be made public. He was the one who chose to get into the ring.

  5. Mike permalink
    November 12, 2009 7:33 am

    I thought she was in a beauty contest, not a morality contest. Who doesn’t have their little secrets? Glass Houses people … let’s remember she was being judged on her nice rear end, her sexuality and her looks, not on whether or not she can solve the world’s problems. Of course it was all done under the guize of “The betterment of young women” but when’s the last time a plain Jane won one of these contests? These contests are pure exploitation, pure and simple.

    That thing called Perez Hilton used her as a launching board for his own purposes. Ruin one life to make yourself some cash. Anyone look in his closet lately? He is a vile, disgusting person who only got to be on the panel because of our inane faith in political correctness.

    People get so caught up in persecution, when you know damn good and well your own life would never hold up. She was honest. How stupid of her right? HONEST. That was one of the supposed criteria for the contest in the first place right? Gee, no one did that part better than her, but because she had an unpopular opinion she was torn to pieces. We’re so worried about hurting people’s feelings in this country. You say she “got into the ring and deserves the punches” well gays who get want to get married are going to get punches too, but we coddle them and tell them everything will be ok.

    I hope Carrie gets away from all this and becomes succesful. I hope gays will be allowed to get married, because love is love and who are we to judge? I hope people’s honest opinions will someday be viewed fairly and openly, and finally, I hope Perez Hilton falls off the proverbial cliff and is never heard from again.

  6. Bob Smith permalink
    November 12, 2009 7:36 am

    QUOTE: The distribution chain begins with the boyfriend



    The distribution chain begins with Carrie Prejean. If charges of child pornography start going out, she would necessarily have to be charged as well, since she is the one who produced and initially distributed the child pornography in qustion.

    And yes, there is legal precedent for prosecuting underage females for distributing nude photos and videos of themselves.

    Case in point:

    In an unusual legal case arising from the increasingly popular practice known as “sexting,” six Pennsylvania high school students are facing child pornography charges after three teenage girls allegedly took nude or semi-nude photos of themselves and shared them with male classmates via their cell phones.

    The female students at Greensburg Salem High School in Greensburg, Pa., all 14- or 15-years-old, face charges of manufacturing, disseminating or possessing child pornography while the boys, who are 16 and 17, face charges of possession, according to WPXI-TV in Pittsburgh, which published the story on its Web site on Tuesday.

    Be careful about wishing for TMZ and the boyfriend to get prosecuted on child porn charges, because you could also be setting up Ms. Prejean herself to be charged as well.

    • November 12, 2009 9:06 am

      Yes, there is legal precedent for charging students with videotaping themselves — a highly controversial and exceedingly recent one, I’m given to understand. If this is indeed an underage sex tape, and if Carrie shot it for a boyfriend as others charged have done, it was stupid — and knowing he probably sent copies to a dozen people within the first week is punishment enough. In the same scenario, if a boyfriend sold such a tape, or someone leaked an illegal tape to humiliate a young woman who had a good legal case against them, that’s exploitative, harmful, and prurient. Not to mention, illegal.

      The first legal question is whether the syllogism is valid.

  7. liz permalink
    November 12, 2009 10:10 am

    this woman does not exemplify Christian principals or morals.
    whoever describes her as such is as misguided as she obviously is.
    Wow. She is wallowing in the mire. Christ lifts people up and out of the muck.
    Prejean is just pulling christians down into it.

    • themadjewess permalink
      November 12, 2009 11:45 am

      Liz…What is the scripture?? “He who is without sin, cast the first stone?”
      So, Liz, you are perfect…

      I’ll tell you this much, Liz, your condemnation of this young lady is NOT “Christian-like” you are hanging this poor young lady out to dry. Shame on YOU! SHE IS 22!!!! She is a KID, and you offer nothing to this young girl, but MORE attacks.
      What do Christians say? WWJD?

  8. brian permalink
    November 12, 2009 11:17 am

    Just like she claimed her nude pictures were taken when she was 17, unfortunately for her the pictures were after her breast implants (19) and supposedly the video is as well. Good strategy to try to prevent them from being released if you cant be so easily proved a liar. Guess the Christian right is going to stop inviting her to speaking engagements to be a ‘role model’

    • November 12, 2009 12:48 pm

      Brian, as for her “role model” bit, read this post. Thanks.

  9. The Center Square permalink
    November 13, 2009 7:43 am

    For me, the most relevant Christianity aspect of this episode relates to Matthew 7:1 — “Judge not, lest you be judged.”

    Whether one’s own views are “liberal,” “conservative” or some other flavor, perhaps the one thing most everyone can agree on that Ms. Prejean’s comments at the pageant started this mess. That triggered two things. One, the inevitable expressions of support from the right, and equally inevitable expressions of indignation from the left.

    Two, and just as importantly, she put herself in the public eye as one who judges others. Whether or not one agrees with her beliefs, it is quite understandable that she now finds herself being judged. I think that students of Christ’s teachings realize that.

    • brian permalink
      November 13, 2009 7:50 am

      Well said, regardless of your religious or political inclinations, people do not like to be judged, and if you are so daring to judge in a public forum be carefull to protect your glass house because stones will be thrown and hypocrites will be revealed.

    • November 15, 2009 6:37 am

      You say that Carrie put herself in the public eye as one who judges others, but in what way has she judged anyone? In the first instance, she stated agreement with a biblical principle. It would seem strange and nonsensical if every time you expressed agreement with something in the bible you were considered guilty of passing judgment on others. If I say I believe in God, does that mean I’m judging atheists?

      • The Center Square permalink
        November 15, 2009 7:57 am

        Here is her original quote:

        “Well I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one way or the other. We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage. And, you know what, in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, no offense to anybody out there. But that’s how I was raised and I believe that it should be between a man and a woman.”

        Consider the core of her statement: “In my country,… marriage should be between a man and a woman.” She goes beyond offering her personal, private opinion, instead offering her judgment on what marital rights should be for everyone else. To use your analogy, it is the difference between saying, “I believe in God” and saying, “In my country, people should believe in God.” So, I am not surprised that who are in a same-sex marriage, or those who support that right, have seen this as judgmental.

        The fact that her judgment corresponds to Christian teaching (although that itself is hotly debated, of course), is a reason to agree or disagree with her judgment. But judgment it remains.

  10. Nick Vachon permalink
    November 13, 2009 4:08 pm

    In many states 17 is legal. Of course, if the tape was made in California it would not be.

Comments are closed.