Add RSS RSS

Adriana Dominguez: From A Playboy Source

Adriana Dominguez 2 Brooklyn Law School Playboy Above the Law blog.JPGRegular readers are very familiar, perhaps more than they’d like to be, with Adriana Dominguez. She’s the third-year student at Brooklyn Law School who appeared nude in a video for Playboy TV. You’ve seen a lot of her [quasi-NSFW] in the pages of ATL.

We recently had an interesting telephone conversation with a source inside Playboy concerning Ms. Domginuez. Our source had this to say:

“This is really a non-story. So she posed naked while still in school — big deal. It’s not like she was getting triple anal!!!”

Guess that’s the “gold standard” of the porn industry. If you’re reading this over lunch, our apologies.

“This has no relevance to her bar admission. What bar would bother looking into this? All she has to do [to be admitted] is pass a test and not perjure herself.”

Our tipster thinks this is all much ado about nothing — a trumped-up story. And a story, our tipster speculates, that was manufactured by Adriana herself:

“Adriana wanted to get a little notoriety, sell a story. She was reaching out for fame…. [The New York Daily News] didn’t call her; she hired someone to call them.”

Very interesting. More from our source at Playboy, after the jump.

After the story hit the New York Daily News, which first reported it, Playboy reached out to Adriana. They offered her, um, greater exposure:

“We immediately got in touch with her. We told her, ‘If you think Playboy has been unfair [to you], we will give you an hour on the air, live on Playboy Radio, to tell your side of the story.’ But she turned that down, on the advice of her lawyer.”

Why did Playboy make this offer to Adriana? Had she complained to them about the experience? Our source says that she had not. But Playboy would not want Adriana to regret her participation in the show in any way:

“We wouldn’t want anyone to leave the Playboy experience with a bad taste in her mouth.”

Indeed. Presumably they keep Listerine handy on the set.

So why did Adriana turn down the offer of free airtime?

“We offered her an hour on Playboy Radio. No host, just her, telling her version of events. We would just screen the phones [for callers out to harass her]. But she declined, on the advice of her lawyer. Maybe she’s playing for bigger stakes.”

Like a book or TV deal, suggests our tipster.

Was Adriana paid for her participation in the Playboy TV show? No, says our source. But she was paid a modest amount by Andrew Einhorn, the photographer for whom she posed, for appearing in his book.

Oh yes — let’s clarify that. Here’s some background about the Playboy TV show that Adriana participated in (because some of the earlier coverage was confusing).

Andrew Einhorn is a professional photographer based in New York. He published a book called Happy Naked Girls — a high-end, artistic, coffee-table photography book — described on Amazon as follows:

The idea of a photographer asking New York women he meets randomly to pose nude for him is not exactly new — books with similar approaches include Peter Gorman’s Naked in Apartment 7, Greg Friedler’s Naked New York, and at a stretch, even Richard Kern’s New York Girls — but Andrew Einhorn does the job proficiently. Einhorn is in his late 30s, and according to his biographical paragraph, he lives in Manhattan and works as a photographer, videographer, editor and comedian.

The photographs are in black and white, taken in different people’s appointments. The women look like they are mostly in their twenties, with a few being slightly older. Each has about 8 or 10 photographs, most about 4” x 6” in size. Einhorn manages to make his models relax and there is often a sense of fun to the pictures.

Playboy heard about Einhorn, and they liked the idea of a photographer approaching random women and asking them to pose naked for him. So they decided to build a reality TV series around it.

Adriana Dominguez was one of the women photographed for Einhorn’s book, and featured as such in the Playboy reality show. That’s all. There was no sex in the Playboy TV video (or anything remotely close to it). It was just Playboy filming a photographer taking pictures of Adriana.

So is this all terribly overblown? Sure. But making mountains out of molehills — okay, they were more than molehills, as those of you who have seen them can attest — is one of our specialities here at ATL.

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of Adriana Dominguez (scroll down)

Comments

avatar
1 Posted by atwork | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 1:57 PM

Am I the only one who thinks the whole porn obsession is making this blog not safe for work? Is this a "legal tabloid" or a pornlaw blog?

avatar
2 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 2:22 PM

Who cares. She's ugly anyway. And she goes to BLS. Just another TTT ho who didn't make it.

avatar
3 Posted by at work also | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 2:30 PM

atwork:

Yes, you're the only one. What's the worst that could happen? They fire us??? Who gives a fuck!

avatar
4 Posted by Anon | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 2:33 PM

Atwork,

Yes, you are. If you're seriously concerned that your employer is going to fire you for reading a blog entry with the word "naked" in it, which is about as explicit as this entry gets, it's time to start looking for a new job.

avatar
5 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 2:54 PM

Anon: "triple anal" is a little more explicit than "naked." No?

avatar
6 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 3:02 PM

2:54pm - if they are monitoring you so closely that they know exactly what you are reading at every moment, maybe it's time to get another job.

I never knew that the welfare department is this strict.

avatar
7 Posted by Anon | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 3:03 PM

I agree with 1:57, and am concerned.

avatar
8 Posted by 3:03 | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 3:13 PM

The links to Playboy pictures and nude videos are the concern--not to mention the only mildly obscured picture Lat previously posted on this issue. If it were just mention of nudity, that would be different.

avatar
9 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 3:38 PM

I always ask men's mag employees for advice on getting admitted to the bar. Unfortunately the octogenarian who interviewed me for NY admission had only hazy knowledge of where the best strippers in town hit the pole.

avatar
10 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 3:42 PM

Hey, wasn't Yale-educated lawyer J. Howard Marshall an octogenarian when he met Anna Nicole Smith at a strip club?

avatar
11 Posted by Anon | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 3:57 PM

3:03,

While conceding that the first picture Lat posted was over the line, what's the problem with *links* to Playboy pics? There's nothing graphic or objectionable about that unless you actually click the link at work, in which case you're an idiot.

avatar
12 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 3:57 PM

Lat,

Please don't give her any more attention.

avatar
13 Posted by 3:57 | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 4:02 PM

If it isn't obvious, my last comment was directed at 3:03's 3:13 comment, not 3:03's 3:03 comment.

avatar
14 Posted by 3:03 | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 4:04 PM

My thought is that links to Playboy pics and videos + the ever-growing pornlawblog flavor of this site might be something I would not want to have to explain to anybody. I would not want to have to make the argument, "Yes, I was reading porn commentary, but I did not click the porno link." We all believe that Bill didn't inhale, right?

avatar
15 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 4:14 PM

My only complaint is that Lat never links to gay porn. He just saves that for himself I guess.

avatar
16 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 4:16 PM

"a high-end, artistic, coffee-table photography book"

ROFLMAO

Yes, a book with a naked woman holding a hair dryer is just the sort of thing people in high society leave lying on their coffee tables. Because borderline porn is just so CLASSY, ya know?

avatar
17 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 4:26 PM

Does Lat have a BF? Does anyone know?

avatar
18 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 4:29 PM

Totall off topic, but I wikied 4/20 just to see what the origin was. It's really interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4:20

avatar
19 Posted by anon | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 4:52 PM

Lat is single:

http://www.friendster.com/davidlat

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=315150

avatar
20 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 5:41 PM

Borderline porn is NOT classy.

Triple anal is.

avatar
21 Posted by anon | Permalink Friday, April 20, 2007 8:10 PM

might i suggest a simple "(not safe for work)" or "(NSFW)" next to these links?

avatar
22 Posted by AN | Permalink Monday, May 7, 2007 12:49 AM

has anyone been to a strip club lately? in general, one might be able to pick out the college/grad student amongst the ladies there. it is a sign of our times, and NOT of the ladies involved that the crappy state of student loans in this country are the reason why you can see suzy from the sorority house at the bada-bing every fri & sat wrapped around a pole. if she were a dude, she may be able to find some manual labor job, but most places don't hire 99 lb women. and if you've ever tried to get a bartending or waitressing job in NY you are well aware that EXTENSIVE experience is required. also, as lawyers, we are all aware of the gross amount of work involved, so full-time jobs tend not to be a viable option if one want to get their degree in under a decade.
no one disagrees that it may not have been the "smartest" but i think it would be more accurate to think about being in such a desperate position as possibly getting kicked out of law school and consider, in an honest manner, whether she made the "best" decision of WHAT WAS AVAILABLE to her and put that in perspective of the predictions as to what her "judgment" as a lawyer might be like.
between the devil and the deep blue sea... most of us will never have to make decisions like that, and no one should have to. but she did. and she has more balls than half the dudes who write judgmental and disrespectful quotes about this person.
who are we to judge?

Post Your Comment