More Fallout From U.S. Attorney Dismissals, DOJ Oversaw Sale of Obscene Materials

WASHINGTON — Reasons surrounding the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys last year may still remain unclear as the House Judiciary Committee continues to investigate, but court documents reveal that one of the ousted prosecutors, Arizona U.S Attorney Paul Charlton, may have been put on the chopping block because of the JM Productions obscenity trial.

In an ironic twist of fate, the U.S. government may have supervised the sale of the four adult titles now at issue in the JM Productions obscenity trial, according to court documents.

In an Aug. 31 motion to dismiss the obscenity charges against Christopher Ankeney and Five Star Video, attorney Richard Hertzberg argued that the government had overseen the sale of the videos in question — “Filthy Things 6,” “Gag Factor 15,” “Gag Factor 18” and “American Bukkake 13.”

According to court documents, the government’s involvement in the sale of the indicted JM videos began some years earlier when another Arizona retailer, The Castle Megastore corporation, filed for bankruptcy.

Under the terms of the bankruptcy settlement, the U.S. Trustee’s Office of the Justice Department administered Castle’s business while it attempted to pay off its creditors. During that time, the U.S. government appointed Vern Schweigert and Mark Franks to run the day-to-day operations of the company. Between 2003 and 2006, Castle stores throughout Arizona sold more than 100 copies of the four indicted titles, according to court papers.

In the motion to dismiss, Hertzberg argued that the U.S. government, which oversaw Castle’s business, was estopped — barred — from bringing an obscenity charge against his client, Five Star, because it had in fact approved the sale the indicted materials.

“The court should dismiss this case because the government itself has acquiesced in a community standard that permits sale of the indicted materials,” Hertzberg wrote.

Hertzberg declined to comment to XBIZ on the case or the politics surrounding Charlton’s dismissal, saying only that the former was an ongoing criminal matter.

Free Speech Coalition Board Chairman Jeffrey Douglas told XBIZ the government’s position in the case against JM and Five Star is embarrassing and hypocritical.

“It is bizarre beyond belief that the federal government is engaging in the same behavior that they themselves are indicting others for engaging in on a much smaller scale,” Douglas said.

Less than a month after Herzberg’s motion to dismiss, Brent Ward, who heads Justice’s obscenity task force, emailed Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, to raise concerns about Charlton and another U.S. attorney, Dan Bogden, with respect to obscenity prosecutions in their districts.

“We have two U.S. attorneys who are unwilling to take good cases we have presented to them,” Ward wrote. “They are Paul Charlton in Phoenix (this is urgent) and Dan Bogden in Las Vegas. In light of the AG's [Attorney General's] comments at the NAC to 'kick butt and take names,’ what do you suggest I do? Do you think at this point that these names should go through channels to reach the AG, or is it enough for me to give the names to you? If you want to act on what I give you, I will be glad to provide a little more context for each of the two situations.”

In Charlton’s case, the emphasis that the matter was urgent suggests that officials in Washington were referring to the only obscenity trial in Arizona — the JM/Five Star litigation.

Ann Harwood, Charlton’s second in command, told reporters that she knew of no other obscenity case in Arizona.

At the time, no case had been filed by Bogden in Nevada.

Whether officials at Justice pressed Charlton to go forward with a case that could have been a potential embarrassment to law enforcement in Arizona, given the federal government’s involvement in the Castle bankruptcy, or whether Charlton balked at such a proposition is unknown. However, Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. John Conyers Jr., D-Mich., has vowed to find out why eight U.S. attorneys, including Charlton and Bogden, were dismissed.

“We will get to the bottom of this crisis in our Justice Department with or without cooperation,” he said. “The U.S. attorneys are entrusted with tremendous power in our criminal justice system. Using the U.S. attorneys as political pawns undermines their critical work in fighting terrorism and risks subjecting the power of the prosecutor to partisan whims.”

One known element in the Charlton saga is Washington’s schizophrenic characterization of his suitability to hold the office of U.S. attorney. At times he was rated highly by the administration, while at other times his name appeared on memos of U.S. attorneys to be fired.

White House Counsel and former U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, who headed the Bush Administration’s review of the U.S. attorneys to be dismissed, vacillated on Charlton. His name was not on the original March 2, 2005 list of attorneys to be dismissed, nor did Sampson originally include Charlton in a Jan. 1, 2006 memo regarding the same issue. Charlton’s name does appear on a Feb. 10, 2006 memo on the same subject, but an April 14 memo from Sampson does not list Charlton as an attorney to be dismissed.

The case against JM and Five Star remains a pending matter in the U.S. District Court for Arizona. No trial date has been set.

At the same time Conyers released his documents from his investigation to the press, Gonzales announced that Sampson, who orchestrated what Conyers called a purge, had resigned.

While it is not uncommon for U.S. Presidents to replace all U.S. attorneys, doing so midterm is an unusual step.

Copyright © 2025 Adnet Media. All Rights Reserved. XBIZ is a trademark of Adnet Media.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.

More News

UPDATED: Supreme Court Rules Against Adult Industry in Pivotal Texas AV Case

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday issued its decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, striking a blow against the online adult industry by ruling in support of Texas’ controversial age verification law, HB 1181.

North Carolina Passes Extreme Bill Targeting Adult Sites

The North Carolina state legislature this week ratified a bill that would impose new regulations that industry observers have warned could push adult websites and platforms to ban most adult creators and content.

Supreme Court Ruling Due Friday in FSC v. Paxton AV Case

The U.S. Supreme Court will rule on Friday in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, the adult industry trade association's challenge to Texas’ controversial age verification law, HB 1181.

Ofcom: More Porn Providers Commit to Age Assurance Measures

A number of adult content providers operating in the U.K. have confirmed that they plan to introduce age checks in compliance with the Online Safety Act by the July 25 deadline, according to U.K. media regulator Ofcom.

Aylo Says It Will Comply With UK Age Assurance Requirements

Tech and media company Aylo, which owns various adult properties including Pornhub, YouPorn and Redtube, plans to introduce age assurance methods in the United Kingdom that satisfy government rules under the Online Safety Act, the company has announced.

Kyrgyzstan Parliament Approves Measure Outlawing Internet Porn

The Supreme Council of Kyrgyzstan on Wednesday passed legislation outlawing online adult content in the country.

Trial Set for Lawsuit by U Wisconsin Professor Fired Over Adult Content

A trial date of June 22, 2026, has been set for the civil lawsuit filed by veteran communications professor Joe Gow against the University of Wisconsin board of regents, which fired him for creating and appearing in adult content.

New UK Task Force Meets to Target Adult Content

The architect of an influential report that recommended banning adult content deemed “degrading, violent and misogynistic” has convened an “Independent Pornography Review task force” aimed at translating that report’s findings into action in the U.K.

French Court Suspends Age Verification Rule for EU Sites

The Paris Administrative Court has suspended enforcement of age verification regulations for sites based in other European Union member nations, pending a final judgment on whether France’s AV rules align with EU standards.

UK Parliament Weighs Proposals Targeting Adult Content

The U.K. Parliament this week debated proposed amendments to the pending Crime and Policing Bill, including clauses criminalizing “choking” content — and potentially outlawing paying for sex acts in cam performances and custom clips.

Show More