Wednesday, May 28, 2008    Text size: 

Little was indicted on federal obscenity charged last May for allegedly mailing materials across state lines that the prosecution described as obscene. Charges against Little also involved the alleged transmission of video clips that the prosecution called obscene.

The legal definition of obscenity stands at the center of Little's trial, with the prosecution and defense arguing over how much of Little’s movies the jurors should view.

The prosecution presented the 15 minutes of footage shown this morning, with plans to show approximately two and a half hours of Little's movies.

But defense attorney H. Louis Sirkin said that wasn't enough. He has argued that the jury should watch the movies in their entirety to decide if they meet the legal definition of obscenity. To that end, Sirkin said that the jury should watch all of the movies in open court.

Current language governing the legal definition of obscenity does require that a work be "taken as a whole" to determine whether it meets the definition.

According to TampaBay.com, U.S. District Judge Susan C. Bucklew has not yet issued a ruling in the trial.

Sirkin, who waived his opening statement until the defense presents its case, also argued that the videos were made with consenting adult performers and by a company, Jaded Video, in which Little holds no interest.

In its opening statement, the prosecution said that they weren't trying to attack the entire adult industry.

"We're here to present evidence, in the defendant's words, of extreme acts," said Federal prosecutor Lisa Maria Freitas.