Why Evan Emory Could Spend 20 Years In Jail For Edited ‘Prank’ YouTube Video

Evan EmoryUnfortunately the original video is removed, however I cannot reasonably see how this man could face up to 20 years for a fake, edited skit. If anybody has the original, please share in comments. The Chicago Tribune reports:

The Muskegon County prosecutor who charged a 21-year-old West Michigan college student with manufacturing child abusive material says a recall effort targeting him likely is based on misinformation.

Tony Tague tells the Muskegon Chronicle he “will not be deterred in my efforts to protect the children of Muskegon County” after a Facebook group dedicated to his recall was set up.

Tague charged Evan Emory of Fruitport in connection with a sexually-themed YouTube video he [edited] that featured local first-grade students and vulgar lyrics.

, , , , , , , , ,

  • Rohatsu

    You can’t reasonably see why this kid would face 20 years?
    Well I live 10 miles away from and work in Muskegon county. The general demographic is a high poverty African American population living in the city of Muskegon which has a disgustingly high crime and murder rate surrounded by suburbs of neoconservative, evangelical/reformed middle class whites and outlying farming communities of fervent tea party, low poverty whites (Ravenna- the township and school district in which the video was filmed being one of those excessively rural and conservative communities). In other words….this is your standard conservative retaliation for embarrassment of Christian values and damage to a rural all-American reputation. Plus I would hazard a guess that the technologically confounded parents pushing this prosecutor for a max sentence may be unaware of the fact that videos can be removed from YouTube and believe this video to have been seen by the entire world causing irreparable damage to their children’s continued developmental growth.

    In all fairness though…I also understand that this video was EXCESSIVELY lewd and perverse rather than simply featuring some dirty words or innuendos. Why anybody would want to show such a thing at an open mic night is beyond my ken.

    • Weekendsvanatta

      thank you for your response. well spoken

  • Rohatsu

    You can’t reasonably see why this kid would face 20 years?
    Well I live 10 miles away from and work in Muskegon county. The general demographic is a high poverty African American population living in the city of Muskegon which has a disgustingly high crime and murder rate surrounded by suburbs of neoconservative, evangelical/reformed middle class whites and outlying farming communities of fervent tea party, low poverty whites (Ravenna- the township and school district in which the video was filmed being one of those excessively rural and conservative communities). In other words….this is your standard conservative retaliation for embarrassment of Christian values and damage to a rural all-American reputation. Plus I would hazard a guess that the technologically confounded parents pushing this prosecutor for a max sentence may be unaware of the fact that videos can be removed from YouTube and believe this video to have been seen by the entire world causing irreparable damage to their children’s continued developmental growth.

    In all fairness though…I also understand that this video was EXCESSIVELY lewd and perverse rather than simply featuring some dirty words or innuendos. Why anybody would want to show such a thing at an open mic night is beyond my ken.

  • Weekendsvanatta

    thank you for your response. well spoken

  • Weekendsvanatta

    ok frankly these bible belt folks are completely beyond normal behavior in trying to prosecute this person as a pedophile. But showing the kids while singing explicitly is also not cool. the balance? …….

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=612431484 Brian Flowers

      ‘not cool’ is not the same as illegal – for good reason. Running outside and screaming at the top of my lungs that Bush/Obama/my neighbor is the antichrist is also not cool, but still covered by the first amendment. The Westboro Baptist Church is EXTREMELY ‘not cool’, but still covered by the first amendment as well.

  • Weekendsvanatta

    ok frankly these bible belt folks are completely beyond normal behavior in trying to prosecute this person as a pedophile. But showing the kids while singing explicitly is also not cool. the balance? …….

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=612431484 Brian Flowers

    ‘not cool’ is not the same as illegal – for good reason. Running outside and screaming at the top of my lungs that Bush/Obama/my neighbor is the antichrist is also not cool, but still covered by the first amendment. The Westboro Baptist Church is EXTREMELY ‘not cool’, but still covered by the first amendment as well.

  • Deem

    lol…if the ‘whitest kids you know’ do this all the time.

  • Deem

    lol…if the ‘whitest kids you know’ do this all the time.

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    He’s pretty clearly guilty of false pretense and fraud…

    …but thats all…he isn’t guilty of a sex crime…and making the charges reflect some kind of assumed sexual attack against children is an insult to every real victim in the entire country. The prosecutor who did this should be disbarred…for gross incompetence.

  • http://voxmagi-necessarywords.blogspot.com/ VoxMagi

    He’s pretty clearly guilty of false pretense and fraud…

    …but thats all…he isn’t guilty of a sex crime…and making the charges reflect some kind of assumed sexual attack against children is an insult to every real victim in the entire country. The prosecutor who did this should be disbarred…for gross incompetence.

  • Asd

    Americans….

  • Asd

    Americans….

  • DeepCough

    You know what, this editing trick is not new: it’s been done! Kevin Smith did this sort of thing in “Clerks” where he had Jeff Anderson recite a list of very explicit pornographic titles in front of a child, but he edited it in manner to where it only SEEMED like he recited it in front of a child; also, remember Chapelle’s Tyrone Biggums skit where he visits a school and talks to kids about drugs: remember when he says (allegedly) in front of the children, “And that was the first time I suck dick for crack–but not the last”: that’s the same editing trick going right there. Now, should either of these comics go to jail for having pulled the exact same stunt before this guy did? If any there’s any mistake this guy really made, it’s this: he should have blurred their faces–but then again, the video would have been real pointless on that note.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSmE7mhmCUY

  • DeepCough

    You know what, this editing trick is not new: it’s been done! Kevin Smith did this sort of thing in “Clerks” where he had Jeff Anderson recite a list of very explicit pornographic titles in front of a child, but he edited it in manner to where it only SEEMED like he recited it in front of a child; also, remember Chapelle’s Tyrone Biggums skit where he visits a school and talks to kids about drugs: remember when he says (allegedly) in front of the children, “And that was the first time I suck dick for crack–but not the last”: that’s the same editing trick going right there. Now, should either of these comics go to jail for having pulled the exact same stunt before this guy did? If any there’s any mistake this guy really made, it’s this: he should have blurred their faces–but then again, the video would have been real pointless on that note.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSmE7mhmCUY

  • WhiteRose

    The internet is making everyone crazy I say shut her down (insert Sarah Palin). This kid is clearly an idiot who wanted attention give him a full psychological exam, ban him from the internet and make him do community community service. Jail cost taxpayers a lot of money….

    • Deem

      ban him from the internet for doing what exactly? Creating a comedy video a bunch of rednecks overreacted to?

      • WhiteRose

        Courts ban fools like him from using the internet all the time. He showed little kids faces in that video! While I hope he is just an idiot and not a true perv the kids using youtube do need to be sent a message that you CAN’T do anything you want to get your few minutes of fame/infamy. He isn’t Kevin Smith or Dave Chapelle, those guys have real talent and lawyers. The courts need to send a message to IDIOTS like him that the internet is a privilege and not a right then just maybe they will start to learn?

    • DeepCough

      Banning people like Evan Emory on the internet would be the end of Youtube as we know it!

      • WhiteRose

        And if your child was in that video??? How many idiots downloaded it then uploaded it blah blah blah Remember it’s youtube not themtube. He took the time to put this stupid skit together maybe he should have taken the time to get waivers from the parents I think he would have been DENIED. Generation Y? Sigh….

  • WhiteRose

    The internet is making everyone crazy I say shut her down (insert Sarah Palin). This kid is clearly an idiot who wanted attention give him a full psychological exam, ban him from the internet and make him do community community service. Jail cost taxpayers a lot of money….

  • Anonymous

    Charged with child abusive material? I don’t find what he did humorous but in no way do I consider such a video “child abusive material.” He shouldn’t be charged with anything. Heck, he’s already going to have to deal with the bad press and a small community of enraged Catholic conservatives. Because of the latter there’s a good chance he’s going to be lynched anyways.

  • Anonymous

    Charged with child abusive material? I don’t find what he did humorous but in no way do I consider such a video “child abusive material.” He shouldn’t be charged with anything. Heck, he’s already going to have to deal with the bad press and a small community of enraged Catholic conservatives. Because of the latter there’s a good chance he’s going to be lynched anyways.

  • Anonymous

    Charged with child abusive material? I don’t find what he did humorous but in no way do I consider such a video “child abusive material.” He shouldn’t be charged with anything. Heck, he’s already going to have to deal with the bad press and a small community of enraged Catholic conservatives. Because of the latter there’s a good chance he’s going to be lynched anyways.

  • Anonymous

    Charged with child abusive material? I don’t find what he did humorous but in no way do I consider such a video “child abusive material.” He shouldn’t be charged with anything. Heck, he’s already going to have to deal with the bad press and a small community of enraged Catholic conservatives. Because of the latter there’s a good chance he’s going to be lynched anyways.

  • Anonymous

    Charged with child abusive material? I don’t find what he did humorous but in no way do I consider such a video “child abusive material.” He shouldn’t be charged with anything. Heck, he’s already going to have to deal with the bad press and a small community of enraged Catholic conservatives. Because of the latter there’s a good chance he’s going to be lynched anyways.

  • smooth_operator

    Charged with child abusive material? I don’t find what he did humorous but in no way do I consider such a video “child abusive material.” He shouldn’t be charged with anything. Heck, he’s already going to have to deal with the bad press and a small community of enraged Catholic conservatives. Because of the latter there’s a good chance he’s going to be lynched anyways.

  • Anonymous

    Charged with child abusive material? I don’t find what he did humorous but in no way do I consider such a video “child abusive material.” He shouldn’t be charged with anything. Heck, he’s already going to have to deal with the bad press and a small community of enraged Catholic conservatives. Because of the latter there’s a good chance he’s going to be lynched anyways.

  • Liam_McGonagle

    Of course, this is exactly what happens when an institution is desperately in need of a credibility fix: kick a dog; display its power for destruction against a target of (immediate) irrelevance to either the Right or the Left, someone without the resources to properly defend him or herself.

    I expect that where I will differ from most other commentators is in the assignment of the specific pathology here. I suppose that a fair amount of us will say:

    “Another demonstration of the justice inherent in the system! Did you see that? Now that’s what I was going on about! If there’s ever going to be any progress we have to promote an anarcho-syndacalist system with a sort of rotating executive, whereby one person is selected as a sort of executive officer for the week . . . ”

    And if that sounded unduly reductive and nasty on my part:

    1.) Yes, that was nasty on my part. Low blow, reference to “Monty Python and the Holy Grail”

    2.) It is nonetheless, a pretty faithful articulation of a popular but embarrasingly reductivist argument.

    Fact of the matter is that there is NO PERFECT SYSTEM. The human soul is just too far vast and complex to be completely bound by any social system; the best we can do is to participate fully in community, to STRIVE to be adequately responsive to humanity.

    I realise that sounds a bit kumbayaa, especially coming from a recovering Obama zombie. Yeah, I totally fucking sold out the anti-war, gay rights, civil rights crowd on the Left in the past, and I appealed to a shabby type of pragmatism to do it. I sorely fucking regret that now that I’ve been on the receiving end of the lies of the traditionalist power brokers like Obama.

    I’m still working my way through this–as I think every one is, even some former Tea-Baggers–in the wake of the Madison Uprising. But some firm conclusions do seem useful guideposts for charting the way forward:

    1. There is no perfect system. All systems are capable of being gamed.

    2. True, there are some systems which are truly awful, that don’t even contemplate or play lip service to notions of fairness or responding to the needs of the people. But I don’t yet think our proscribed system is one of them. We have, at least for the moment, some NOMINAL rights.

    3. I think the operative issue is that as a society we no longer respect or cultivate true empathy or intellectual debate. It’s the subjective landscape, I say, not the objective design of the system that is at fault.

    Beyond the immediate implications for this single (and in my opinion, not-so-talented) entertainer, the real question is whether we have the guts and brains left to begin the process of cultivating our empathy and our IDEALS again.

    This is gonna be a tough one. Few will even understand the issue. Even fewer will be capable of surrendering their personal prejudices to engage in the heavy lifting needed to make progress.

  • Liam_McGonagle

    Of course, this is exactly what happens when an institution is desperately in need of a credibility fix: kick a dog; display its power for destruction against a target of (immediate) irrelevance to either the Right or the Left, someone without the resources to properly defend him or herself.

    I expect that where I will differ from most other commentators is in the assignment of the specific pathology here. I suppose that a fair amount of us will say:

    “Another demonstration of the justice inherent in the system! Did you see that? Now that’s what I was going on about! If there’s ever going to be any progress we have to promote an anarcho-syndacalist system with a sort of rotating executive, whereby one person is selected as a sort of executive officer for the week . . . ”

    And if that sounded unduly reductive and nasty on my part:

    1.) Yes, that was nasty on my part. Low blow, reference to “Monty Python and the Holy Grail”

    2.) It is nonetheless, a pretty faithful articulation of a popular but embarrasingly reductivist argument.

    Fact of the matter is that there is NO PERFECT SYSTEM. The human soul is just too far vast and complex to be completely bound by any social system; the best we can do is to participate fully in community, to STRIVE to be adequately responsive to humanity.

    I realise that sounds a bit kumbayaa, especially coming from a recovering Obama zombie. Yeah, I totally fucking sold out the anti-war, gay rights, civil rights crowd on the Left in the past, and I appealed to a shabby type of pragmatism to do it. I sorely fucking regret that now that I’ve been on the receiving end of the lies of the traditionalist power brokers like Obama.

    I’m still working my way through this–as I think every one is, even some former Tea-Baggers–in the wake of the Madison Uprising. But some firm conclusions do seem useful guideposts for charting the way forward:

    1. There is no perfect system. All systems are capable of being gamed.

    2. True, there are some systems which are truly awful, that don’t even contemplate or play lip service to notions of fairness or responding to the needs of the people. But I don’t yet think our proscribed system is one of them. We have, at least for the moment, some NOMINAL rights.

    3. I think the operative issue is that as a society we no longer respect or cultivate true empathy or intellectual debate. It’s the subjective landscape, I say, not the objective design of the system that is at fault.

    Beyond the immediate implications for this single (and in my opinion, not-so-talented) entertainer, the real question is whether we have the guts and brains left to begin the process of cultivating our empathy and our IDEALS again.

    This is gonna be a tough one. Few will even understand the issue. Even fewer will be capable of surrendering their personal prejudices to engage in the heavy lifting needed to make progress.

    • Dennis

      Dude-This isn’t one of the great sociological or philosophical arguments for our age.  A kid made a video.
      The villagers overeacted, Maybe they’re marchin’ to the castle with torches and pitchforks, but he’s not going to prison. 
      There are alot better things to base all our high-falutin’ cogitations on.

  • Deem

    ban him from the internet for doing what exactly? Creating a comedy video a bunch of rednecks overreacted to?

  • Masflojo

    Could someone please find the phone number to the district attorney in charge of this kids case so rational people can spam the hell out of his/her office?

  • Masflojo

    Could someone please find the phone number to the district attorney in charge of this kids case so rational people can spam the hell out of his/her office?

  • News

    If this is the case, then throw the makers of “Wonder Showzen” in the hole with this guy! This is crazy, I can see this guy getting in trouble, but 20 years? Really?

  • News

    If this is the case, then throw the makers of “Wonder Showzen” in the hole with this guy! This is crazy, I can see this guy getting in trouble, but 20 years? Really?

  • DeepCough

    Banning people like Evan Emory on the internet would be the end of Youtube as we know it!

  • WhiteRose

    Courts ban fools like him from using the internet all the time. He showed little kids faces in that video! While I hope he is just an idiot and not a true perv the kids using youtube do need to be sent a message that you CAN’T do anything you want to get your few minutes of fame/infamy. He isn’t Kevin Smith or Dave Chapelle, those guys have real talent and lawyers. The courts need to send a message to IDIOTS like him that the internet is a privilege and not a right then just maybe they will start to learn?

  • WhiteRose

    And if your child was in that video??? How many idiots downloaded it then uploaded it blah blah blah Remember it’s youtube not themtube. He took the time to put this stupid skit together maybe he should have taken the time to get waivers from the parents I think he would have been DENIED. Generation Y? Sigh….

  • Aminor14th

    I think this is protected under the First Amendment something no one cares about until they lose it; Next they will come for you.

  • Aminor14th

    I think this is protected under the First Amendment something no one cares about until they lose it; Next they will come for you.

  • Dennis

    Dude-This isn’t one of the great sociological or philosophical arguments for our age.  A kid made a video.
    The villagers overeacted, Maybe they’re marchin’ to the castle with torches and pitchforks, but he’s not going to prison. 
    There are alot better things to base all our high-falutin’ cogitations on.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=561270894 David Crowe

    Huge overreaction. This is pure bullshit. As for all this talk of banning people from the internet, go get bent. That’s just more foolishness of the same ilk. It makes me shake my head.

  • David Crowe

    Huge overreaction. This is pure bullshit. As for all this talk of banning people from the internet, go get bent. That’s just more foolishness of the same ilk. It makes me shake my head.