Believe what you want, I would not have expected anything other than apologia on anything to do with Brent/Sean.

What I heard in the conversations was far from defense/cover for Bryan. And as for the nature of the conversations, why would it matter to you? They weren't about Sean working for us; in fact, that issue was never even raised.

For the record, I'm not claiming that Bryan did not have reason to suspect Sean was underage; he had reports even before the first videos were released, that was clear in the initial conversations. What's different is the nature of exactly when Bryan knew for sure that Sean was underage at the time of the filming of the initial scenes, and who was primarily responsible.

The conversations -- and there were a number of them -- between Sean and I took place before Sean got set up with Chad, and there are emails back and forth that document everything (and unlike those of some of the bloggers, mine are complete with headers, IP addresses, supporting documents, etc.)

Like I said, I don't wish to argue. I would be about the last person to defend Bryan, as I agree that his behaviors, as documented by many, were deplorable. I just dislike revisionist history, particularly when Bryan isn't around to document his side of things, and when the other side keeps trying to revise things further and further to make Sean look more and more blameless.