‘Frankenchrist’ Poster Case

On Sept. 4, The Times published a letter from Franci Levine of Agoura who appears to have some misperceptions about the “Frankenchrist” album poster case which I feel compelled to address, since they reflect the web of distortion spun by the defense throughout the litigation.

The case did not involve anyone’s music. It did not involve artistic endeavor. It did not involve pornography. It did not involve the First Amendment. What it involved was a montage of 10 sets of decaying, excrement-smeared male and female genitals engaged in sexual intercourse, and our belief that the poster was, under state law, harmful matter for viewing by the 13-year-old girl who purchased the album with which the poster was packaged for her 11-year-old brother. The fact that the poster was made by someone famous was irrelevant.

The charges I filed in the “Frankenchrist” album poster case involved state Penal Code Section 313.1, which prohibits the distribution of harmful matter to children. Those charges were filed as a result of a complaint from a woman whose 13-year-old daughter had purchased the album and poster from a record store. I felt there was enough evidence to prove a violation of law and certainly enough evidence to let a jury decide the issue. The court agreed and denied all defense motions to the contrary. On Aug. 28, a Los Angeles Municipal Court jury was unable to determine if the owner and general manager of Alternative Tentacles Records, which distributed the poster, were guilty of distributing harmful matter to children and the case was dismissed by the court.

Despite defense attempts to distort the facts, the case never involved the album itself or the defendants’ right to produce the poster for viewing by adults. Our plain and simple contention was that the poster was harmful matter for viewing by children. While jurors found they could not unanimously agree with us (the split was five for guilty and seven for not guilty), that was only one outcome of one case. It does not mean that my office will stop enforcing a law that prohibits distribution of this type of material to children not yet ready to make adult judgments.

I want to commend the prosecutor who handled this case, Deputy City Atty. Michael Guarino, for his work amid the distortions created by the defense. I also want to make clear that I will continue to vigorously prosecute these types of cases whenever complaints are made and criminal charges are appropriate.

JAMES K. HAHN

City Attorney

Los Angeles