July 13, 2002 04:52pm
The Latour Letter - Dirty Underwear Terrorism
Source: Adult Industry News
by: Miss Charlie Latour
Alright, that does it! I am now fully convinced that some government officials have lost touch with reality. I want to be the first to warn all parents, who have kids in college, that Uncle Sam is watching you very closely. If your child mails his or her clothing home to be laundered (there are more who do this than you would want to believe) they could face jail time and a stiff fine.
Let's go to South Carolina, a beautiful state that is populated with smart, attractive and sensual people. US Attorney Strom Thurmond Jr. brought charges against a former Clemson University woman who sold her used underwear to willing customers through a Website. Christine Vetter faced five years in prison and a $250,000 fine for mailing "indecent and filthy substances".
Vetter admitted in court that she operated the Website from November 2000 to March of 2002 and had sold and mailed $9,000 worth of used underwear, sex toys and other personal items. I checked with sources and she was charged with a mail violation, not for selling the items. So it is not the dirty underwear being sold that got her into trouble, it is the mailing of the "filthy substances". How dangerous is this prosecution?
I remember my brother went to New Mexico for a Boy Scout camp one summer. At the end of the summer he mailed his dirty laundry home to my mother. Talk about filthy substances! His underwear was so disgusting that my mother threw it out. This prosecution could be extended to include Boy Scout campers, college students, missionaries or any other person who mails a piece of clothing which is not certifiable as clean. This was an idiotic persecution of this woman!
But it gets better! The only reason officials went after this young lady was because a customer who was unhappy with their transaction mailed a letter to her and labeled the outside as containing child pornography. The letter did not contain child porn and a complete investigation of Ms. Vetter found no child porn. I can only guess that the US Postal Inspectors and the US Attorney for South Caroline were so disappointed that they had to go after Ms. Vetter any way they could.
Why prosecute Ms. Vetter and not the person who mailed the letter? Didn't the person who mailed the letter break the law by conspiring to deceive federal officials and to cause great harm to Ms. Vetter? Why not go after them? Or will this be the next wave of terrorism in this country. Will the radical right and ultra left start to mail letters to anyone they suspect disagrees with their point of view and mark the letters, "Warning-Contains Child Pornography" For the sole purpose of terrorizing them into submission? The storm troopers from the US Postal Inspector General's Office and the US Attorney's office can march into your house and tear apart every aspect of your life looking for non-existent child pornography. Meanwhile, the media has so damaged your name and reputation in the rush to print the next sensational sex story that your life is ruined. In Ms. Vetter's case the media prints a small little statement that the "letter did not contain child pornography", yet it is lost in the headlines "Woman Faces Prison for Selling Dirty Underwear".
We need to think about this ladies and gentlemen. The US Government has determined that soiled underwear is "filthy and obscene". Every college student, Boy Scout, camper, missionary or traveler who ever mailed soiled clothing home to mom is a potential criminal. My own brother was a juvenile criminal, although I think the statue of limitation may have run out. He is now a Vietnam war veteran and the pastor of a church. A real criminal type! Believe me, I was real little and I remember how filthy the underwear was. Ms. Vetter pleaded guilty and closed her Website and is living her life with this unbelievable stain on her record.
This story did not make headlines across the country and it has not stimulated the ACLU or any other group to action, but it is a very dangerous prosecution. If the Supreme Court can not come to agreement on the definition of pornography and the former President can not define what "Is" is, then how can the US Postal Service define what is "filthy"? Ms. Vetter got a raw deal and I understand that copping a plea to end the expensive and damaging legal process was probably her best bet. Politicians, Prosecutors and Postal Inspectors are all paid by the public. They have unlimited resources and they will crush you if given the chance. Once they determined the child porn charges were false, it would have been better to drop the case and pursue real criminals, like terrorist who take advantage of our freedoms to rain havoc on our society, or corporate big wigs who rape and plunder the savings of ordinary Americans.
I hope each elected official remembers this case, because the next time they shit their pants when it is revealed that they took illegal campaign contributions, or got caught fucking their intern they may well be on the way to hard time at their local prison. Not for illegal campaign contributions or fucking the intern, but for the potential of mailing their dirty underwear home to mom.
All I can say is, Stay Alert! I am as concerned with the dirty underwear caper as I am the possible domestic terrorism caused by the tactics used the disgruntled customer of Ms. Vetter and the over-reaction by the US Postal Service and the US Attorney.
For comment please write to Miss Charlie Latour at Latour@AINews.com.