White Dew and Legal Loopholes

Spring Thomas

Most pornographers are scumbags.

But not all of us are scumbags…really. I’m certainly not! I treat my talent with respect, adhere to their boundaries whenever we’re shooting a scene, and always always always hold off on groping them until they give me the thumbs-up to grope them.

However, some pornographers aren’t as nice as me. For example, when I shot Spring Thomas in this blindfolded interracial sex scene, she knew exactly what she was getting into.

Some aren’t so lucky…

Dave Maass writes in the Tuscon Weekly:

Tucson porn-proprietor Tyrone Henry wants you to know that blowing your load on the faces of blindfolded, underage girls who think they’re participating in a facial cream marketing study is not fraud or any other crime, no matter what the Arizona Court of Appeals said last month. He also wants you to know he was framed.

Whether he did it or not, he’s serving a seven-year sentence because of the creative legal work of a Pima County prosecutor, Brad Roach

In the summer of 2000, Roach was assigned to prosecute Tyrone Henry after two teenage girls said he lured them to his home to try out a product called “White Dew” facial cream he was developing. Instead of exfoliation, they said they got ejaculation.

The girls, 15 and 16 years old at the time, said Henry showed them examples of women with “clumpy” white cream on their faces and then blindfolded them. The girls said they heard heavy breathing and Henry say, “It’s coming,” and then felt a thick, warm substance applied to their faces. They said he took photos, paid them $10 a piece and convinced them to make follow-up appointments. Thinking about it later, they realized they’d been hoodwinked and called the police.

Roach admits the hardest part of the case was figuring out what charge he could hang on Henry. It wasn’t sexual assault because he didn’t touch the girls sexually, and they didn’t touch him. And it wasn’t indecent exposure because the girls were blindfolded.

“It was fascinating,” Roach said. “I don’t want to say it was a once-in-a-lifetime case, but it’s only once in awhile do you get something this bizarre.”

In the end, the only charge Roach could get to stick was “fraudulent scheme and artifice.” The Division II of the Arizona Court of Appeals concluded that Roach had made the right decision, knocking down Henry’s appeal.

“It was a huge loophole,” Roach said. “No one in the Legislature had ever thought of it. It’s not the sort of crime that had come up before.”

Spring Thomas

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *