DENTON, TX — It’s been said that honesty is the best policy, and two Texan beauties have plenty to think about on that score after having been handed a legal defeat that hinged, in part, upon the fact that the girls had lied about their age.The case in question featured not-yet-legal Brittany Lowry and Lezlie Fuller who, in 2002, informed the Girls Gone Wild film crew that they were over the age of 18. In truth, the girls were only 17.
Lowry, Fuller, and their parents – all Texas residents — insisted in their suit that a Mantra representative had claimed to be shooting a private film. In 2003, when they realized that they had flashed and engaged in activities considered legally inappropriate for minors as part of a Girls Gone Wild video shot in Panama City Beach, FL, that was being widely sold and circulated, the filed suit against Mantra Films, Hastings Entertainment, Sam Goody, and Suncoast Motion Picture Co., claiming fraud and misappropriation. As the girls and their parents saw it, Mantra, the company responsible for the controversial Girls Gone Wild series, had profited from the release and distribution of the video in which the girls had appeared – and had done so without their permission.
They weren’t able to convince the jury of six men and six women that such had been the case, however.
Two elements likely played key roles in the girls’ ultimate legal and financial disappointment. Although the now 20-year-olds live and filed their suit in Texas, the laws of Florida applied to their case. Under current Florida law, minors have no more right to privacy on public property than do adults, so flashing for a camera at 17 provides no more protection from distribution of the image than does flashing for a camera at 45. Additionally, the girls lied to Mantra Films representatives about their age, claiming to be older then 18.
Although the plaintiffs, who exposed themselves for the camera in exchange for Girls Gone Wild logo identified tank-tops, are unhappy about the outcome of the case, Richard Merrill, part of Mantra’s legal counsel, is satisfied that the outcome was just
“The plaintiffs knew what they were doing,” he sums up. “The jury realized that there were no drugs, alcohol, or coercion involved in what they did.”
