How porn films made a porn movie look bad for years
By Michael C. Hall, The Associated PressNew York City’s most popular porn film studio and its chief executive officer have both been indicted on child pornography charges, according to a federal indictment unsealed Wednesday.
The indictment alleges that the company, named by the Justice Department in May, was in violation of federal law for the past several years by failing to monitor employees and employees of its own company for child pornography, including one employee who used the name “Shark” in an email to the company’s porn division.
The indictment against the company alleges that its chief operating officer, Daniel L. O’Connor, an ex-boyfriend of one of its founders, Daniel F. Ciancio, abused his position of trust with the company by failing “to monitor employees for child exploitation and to investigate or report potential cases of sexual exploitation of minors.”
O’Connor and Ciancios, who also are co-defendants, are scheduled to be arraigned in federal court in Brooklyn on Friday.
They are accused of allegedly paying a man $5,000 to sexually exploit his 13-year-old daughter over a period of several years.
The New York Times first reported the charges against the porn company.
Ciancios is also charged with running the company in an improper manner, including making payments to employees for improper use of the company computer system and failing to report the existence of child pornography to law enforcement.
The indictments against O’Connors and Ciansos do not identify the victims, but The Times reported in June that a former employee of the porn studio was the victim of a sexual abuse by one of the defendants, and that he was abused by a member of the business team, who was not identified.
Ciacos and O’Connells declined to comment.
They were not immediately available for comment.
The investigation of the New York City porn company began in 2010 when an FBI informant learned that the executives of the adult film studio had used the alias “Sharks” in email exchanges with other employees, including the director of the sex section, to communicate with each other about the production of sex tapes and other sexual material.
The email chain included references to a former sex tape, which the government alleges had been made by an undercover employee of “Shots” Productions.
The FBI also found emails from a former porn producer that appeared to show O’Conners instructing another former porn employee, named “Shay,” to obtain nude photographs of underage girls and send them to a business associate.
The company’s attorney, Mark B. Zweibel, said the indictment did not allege the porn production was the result of the operation of an illegal child porn site.
But he said that the email exchanges allegedly revealed that O’Cianns and Ciacos had access to the porn division and the porn files, and did not stop them.
“They knew about the existence and distribution of child porn,” Zweibes said.
“They knew of the fact that the pornography they produced was made to satisfy adult customers.”
In one email, O’Leary instructs a male porn producer to send “the best girl from the city” to a female porn producer.
In another, he instructs an undercover sex worker to send her to another sex worker, who would then be sent nude photographs.
The former porn worker told the FBI that the former porn actress she met in the porn office was her girlfriend.
In an interview, the porn director, who is not named in the indictment, said he was unaware that O.
Connor was a convicted sex offender and that Ciancia was not aware of the criminal charges.
He said that Ciaco had recently started working with his son, Daniel Cianicos, in New York to help them develop a new business called “The Best Boyz.”
The porn director said he believed the business would be an outlet for his son to express himself sexually.
The director said Cianccios was a great father and had been working with the family business since the beginning of this year.
He said that although the business was not a production of child exploitation, the business had done some work on adult websites.
The director said that when he was asked by O’Reilly about the operation, OConnor said, “I’m not sure how it’s going to work out.”
The director added that he had no knowledge of the pornography production until a recent conversation with O’Brien, the founder of the film company, who he said told him, “There’s a guy in New Jersey who’s going around trying to buy up all these porn sites, and he’s doing it as a porn production company.
I told him I’m not going to go out and do that.
He laughed and said, ‘Yeah, you’re doing it.'”
The indictment accuses the two men of sending thousands of child pornographic images to their employees in an attempt to cover up their own child pornography activity.
The alleged operation was carried out