UPDATED: 'Would-Be Performer' Banned From PASS for Forging Talent Testing Service Test

UPDATED: ‘Would-Be Performer’ Banned From PASS for Forging Talent Testing Service Test

The Free Speech Coalition (FSC) issued the following advisory Tuesday about a would-be performer who was caught forging an HIV/STI test:

PASS has banned a person who produced a fraudulent Talent Testing Service (TTS) test.

The person had never completed a full PASS-compliant testing panel with either CET or TTS, and as such had never previously been listed in the PASS database. The person appears to have used a digital image of a clear TTS test that was posted to social media to create the forged image, in an attempt to work on an adult set.

FSC-PASS has secured the would-be performer’s legal name, alerted all PASS-affiliated clinics, and permanently banned them from participating in the database.

Any person who forges a test or otherwise misrepresents themselves to a testing facility is banned from participating in PASS, and thus any PASS-compliant shoots.

We remind everyone not to post images of their tests on social media, and not to rely on easily forgeable printouts or PDFs of a test to verify availability. The only way to verify a performer’s clear availability status is to log directly onto the PASS database. The PASS database is free to use, easy to access and available to any performer, producer or agent.

If any performer or producer would like additional information or instruction regarding how to access the database in order to verify someone’s status, please contact [email protected] .

Eric Paul Leue
Executive Director, Free Speech Coalition

I wonder if this advisory from FSC has anything to do with this tweet by BangBros on Monday concerning a guy named “Chris Rowe”?

Hmmm, I wonder…

12 Replies to “UPDATED: ‘Would-Be Performer’ Banned From PASS for Forging Talent Testing Service Test”

  1. mharris127

    I don’t think I would want to accept a PASS printout alone as proof of a negative VD test and would likely demand a paper test (a producer would be stupid not to make a copy of the actual test document nowadays). However, in this one case a PASS check would have likely caused the test shown by the person discussed in this article to be false. Nonetheless, I am not a fan of the FSC being involved in VD testing, it seems like the Talent Testing verification system would work much better if CET were brought into that system — but evidently PASS did stop someone from using a forged test to fuck porn talent here.

    As for “Chris Rowe”, he deserves to take Maitresse Madeline’s biggest strap-on in and out of his ass until it gushes blood, his asshole tears open so far that he is never able to hold his shit again and has to wear Depends for the rest of his life! Of course since he had to forge a test he probably has AIDS and the clap anyway (why the hell else would someone forge a VD test in the adult industry) so maybe Madeline better hold off on shoving her strap-on up his likely AIDS infested asshole pending a real VD test.

  2. Karmafan

    If I was a performer I would not trust anything the FSC is involved in, They seem to be doing the studios bidding and not have the performers best interests in mind.

  3. smoke_the_one

    No need for PASS. TTS works okay but the need to get rid of the green thing with dates. The original test results showing all the things tested for and their reference numbers is better, I’ve never seen a fake test that edits the reference numbers or QR code, just the name, age & date. The problem is, performers & escorts like to post their test, so easy to save and edit.

  4. xxxReporter

    That is, potentially, a catastrophically bad suggestion.

    With PASS, if a person has ever been diagnosed with HIV they are barred from the PASS performer pool forever, regardless of whether a test shows their infection to be “undetectable”.

    TTS will simply issue a test saying that their results are undetectable, and a performer can use that to secure performing work on non-pass-compliant shoots.

    What if that performer stops taking/forgets to take/runs out of their meds and books a shoot on day 27 of their 28-day test?

    Note also that, during the last HIV-inspired shutdown, in August, TTS waited 18-24 hours after discovering the infection before contacting FSC.

    I call these issues significant safety problems inherent in relying on TTS alone.

  5. mharris127

    That is why I support adding an ELISA HIV test to the panel. Once that pops positive it always will. I do not support replacing the current RNA test with an ELISA but simply adding it to the panel. As for PASS, my big problem is who is administering it — not the existence of it itself.

  6. mharris127

    I should also note that once someone has a verified HIV infection that person should always be flagged somehow on the TTS system as well.

  7. xxxReporter

    mharris127: You write: “once someone has a verified HIV infection that person should always be flagged somehow on the TTS system as well.”

    The problem is, TTS doesn’t have a “system” at all, beyond test verification. And the long delays in reporting positive tests should be alarming to anyone.

    “As for PASS, my big problem is who is administering it — not the existence of it itself.”

    Yes, a rational person can take issue with FSC and still recognize that the PASS system is the best thing the biz has right now.

    And, to be fair, at the time AIM went kaput, there was no other entity in existence who was willing to come in and do it. It was FSC or LATATA, and LATATA members had a direct financial stake in seeing performers get back to work as quickly as possible. Seriously, would you want Shy Love deciding when it was time to call for or end a moratorium?

  8. mharris127

    I am aware of the backstory with the FSC creating then APHSS and now PASS. I would like to see at least an almost disinterested third party take it over, not a lobbying group intended to defend producer interests. TTS is in a place to do that. I don’t like that there was a delay in reporting the last HIV/AIDS infection to PASS but I am hoping that was a one-time slip up and that it won’t happen again. PASS also needs to have the actual test results or its use in the industry is limited. Producers still have to require talent bring their paper test for copying or they risk losing one hell of a lawsuit. A check mark in PASS isn’t enough, the actual test results are required. All PASS is good for is to check the day before a scene if someone supposedly is tested and if not replace that person then so it doesn’t cause a problem the next day filming a scene. PASS is a start but without the actual test results its use is limited.

    As far as moratoria, the FSC is failing at that. If an HIV test pops positive for an active performer, all production needs to stop for at least 30 days (two test cycles) and those on the first and second generation lists need to be kept from working in a sexual role for 60 days (four test cycles). Anything less is risking another infection. Producers need to teach talent to run a camera, be a PA, whatever to give them some income while they are out of sexual work and on a first or second generation exclusion list/infected with HIV/AIDS and not able to do sex work any longer. Obviously the FSC has fucked this up since they took over monitoring, looking out for the interests of producers over talent — since their job is to lobby for producers of course they are going to make the moratoria as short as they can get away with (their moratoria have averaged only three days — not even enough time to get those on the first and second generation lists into the lab for testing).

    As for Shy Love, she can go get fucked up the ass an AIDS infested Brazilian transsexual hooker, take transsexual cum straight up her ass and get AIDS! There is a whole backstory to that of which I won’t get into too far here (the TL, DR prevention version of it is she got Mike South sued giving him false information, he decided to get out of the journalism business shortly thereafter and this site was sold).

  9. mharris127

    I will add that PASS is good for verifying that a test isn’t forged. There shouldn’t be the OK checkmark in the system if the test isn’t legitimate.

Leave a Reply