[UPDATED] State Court Finds Former Gay Porn Star Mike Dozer Guilty In Child Rape Case

Posted March 24, 2015 by with 49 comments


As Str8UpGayPorn first reported last October, former gay porn star Mike Dozer (legal name Christopher Steele) was found guilty in federal court of three felonies for his sexual involvement with a minor. Now, the state of Pennsylvania has found Dozer/Steele guilty, too, on similar charges stemming from his 2013 sexual assault of a 14-year-old boy.

As you’ll recall, the state had charged Dozer/Steele with over a dozen felonies and misdemeanors, including statutory rape:


As of this posting, it hasn’t been made public which of the above charges Dozer/Steele was found guilty of (it could be only one, it could be all of them), but his sentencing in Pennsylvania is scheduled for next Monday, March 30th.


Dozer/Steele’s federal sentencing is still scheduled for April 14th, although it’s not clear how he’ll serve out that sentence and this state one. Presumably, they can’t be served concurrently, and he’ll have to serve out each sentence separately? If any of you are lawyers with knowledge of duel state/federal prison sentences, feel free to chime in.

Update 4/6/15:

While the state court had indicated that it had found Steele guilty of at least one charge, given the notification of a sentencing date, it now appears that Steele has been given a jury trial in Pennsylvania. It’s scheduled to begin on April 29th.


I’ve reached out to Steele’s lawyer for clarification on what the state court has done, but he has not returned my request for comment. Apparently, the state had tried to convict Steele without ever having a trial? Developing…


  • sxg

    Seth and Billy Santoro will be devastated!


    • McM.

      I believe Billy Santoro changed his stance on Mike Dozer once more information about this case came to light.

      • sxg

        Barely. He still wanted to put a lot of the blame on the victim.

    • zach

      Billy never defended Dozer; his issue was with Jack’d allowing minors on their app.

  • sxg

    I think federal charges come first so he’ll serve out that sentence first, then the state charges. Chances are though he’ll more than likely live the rest of his life in prison, so wouldn’t matter which comes first.

  • A.C.

    The Federal Court judge presiding over his sentencing has the authority to determine if the federal sentence will be served consecutively or concurrently. A myriad of factors are considered in determining whether the sentence will be concurrent or consecutive, but one of those factors is the length of the sentence handed down by the State of Pennsylvania. If the sentence is modest then the Federal sentence could very well be served consecutively, if the sentence is fairly lengthy or potentially longer than the Federal sentence, then the judge may likely allow him to serve his sentencing concurrently. Again, there are other factors to consider, but this is one of the more predominate factors considered. Where he is likely to spend his term of incarceration is also a matter of various considerations, not the least of which is whether there is adequate space for him, whether the prison has facilities for prisoners like him – a population in need of greater protection outside of the general population, etc. I suspect that the Pennsylvania department of corrections is more than apt to that task, so I would venture to guess that he will serve his term of incarceration in the State penitentiary first or exclusively.

    I have followed this case since the story broke for personal as well as professional reasons. As an attorney that works with domestic violence and sexual assault victims as counsel and victims right’s advocate, there are very few things in this world today that still has the ability to move me to disgust and outrage quite like domestic violence and sexual predation – particularly against the emotionally, physically, or intellectually vulnerable in our society. I am compelled by the strictures of my faith to find love and compassion for this unrepentant, pitiable, specimen of a so called man and by the canon of professional ethics to allow civil justice to be served, but it is hard to rally to that end at times – this being one of them. Though the statistics and literature on the subject hold that men like Mr. Dozer are compulsive in their behavior, that compulsion, I would like to believe, will not make him impervious to moral conviction. I pray that one day when he is alone with just him and his thoughts, that he will come to reflect on the entirety of his life and slowly, painfully, and without cessation be haunted by the thoughts of how he came to be where he is now and how he alone is responsible for the ruin of his life and that of his victims. That for me would be true justice and the best finish to this entire sordid and shameful episode.

    • cainenyc

      And if in fact the minor was portending to be of age? No one will ever know but Dozer and the underage person who was on an adult hook up site.

      • sxg

        Whether or not the kid lied about his age doesn’t matter under the law. If you want that to change then feel free to go about trying to change that.

        And this wasn’t a one-time fling they’ve had numerous sexual encounters. So there were multiple times where Dozer could have done his due diligence and asked or verified his age but he didn’t.

        And this was a kid who lived about a 40mile drive from Philadelphia, where Dozer was living. You don’t travel that far for a piece of ass unless he’s your significant other or he’s a piece of ass you don’t easily run into, and in this case it’s a minor.

      • A.C.

        As has been repeated multiple times on this site before, the fact of the minors age was and is of no consequence, even more so now that jurists, having heard all of the evidence (including Mr. Dozer’s defenses) determined that he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. What Mr. Dozer or the underage young man knew or know is irrelevant in light of that.

        • cainenyc

          This entire case reminds me of the Tag Adams case and it makes me wonder about both entrapment and whether or not the minor holds any moral (not legal) responsibility in the situation. People liked Tag Adams so they felt bad for him. Everyone hates Dozer so the opposite appears to be true.

          • A.C.

            I do not know who Mr. Adams is so I cannot comment on the similarities between the cases, however, there was no entrapment in this case as the government was not involved in this matter prior to it investigation. The young men involved were certainly not agents or extensions of the state and it is clear from Mr. Dozer’s encouragement to the young man to recruit others like him [the young man] that he had a propensity toward that particular criminal behavior. In other words Mr. Dozer had an opportunity to commit a crime, which he did. Courts expect that every individual will be law abiding despite the degree of temptation not to be and when they violate the law it demands the prescribed penalty. Mr. Dozer was not entrapped, rather he was enticed and lead astray by his repugnant and aberrant desires.

            The question of the young man’s “guilt” is not germane because he bears no moral responsibility for being the victim of a lecherous deviant like Mr. Dozer. He was dishonest by indicating that he was older than he was, but that alone would never be sufficient to accord him any degree of culpability. As for whether Mr. Dozer is being treated differently because of his popularity, or lack thereof, the frank truth is that it does not matter. He committed what could only tamely be called a despicable act and that is worthy of all of the rebuke and collective condemnation he has received and then some. Whatever distaste that others have for him would be justified regardless of their feelings toward him prior to this matter.

          • cainenyc

            I disagree. He bears responsibility for being on the hookup app in the first place. Dozer didn’t have that much popularity in the first place. He is more known for this than for the handful of D-List scenes he did. But yes, your bias is deafening.

          • A.C.

            I thought that my bias against Mr. Dozer was readily apparent from my first post. Far more than deafening, I would hope that it would be clarion and blinding to boot. Call it an ethical quirk of mine, but I find moral hazard in championing the cause of convicted pedophiles and sexual deviants of his ilk. If you mean to impugn me or my analysis by pointing out my “deafening bias” then please know that I remain resolute and unanimous in that position. To that I will add, that any attempt to equate violating an age restriction rule on a dating app with consciously and actively pursuing a minor for prurient purposes represents a tortured logic in pursuit of the most feeble of moral equivalencies. If It helps to end this line of troubling defense, then fine, I will concede to you that the young man was wrong to be on a dating app for individuals over the age of 18, but you would be hard pressed to construct what is a severely attenuated causal connection between that marginal infraction (and even that is overly dramatic) and Mr. Dozer’s active and conscious pursuit of a minor he knew to be underage and then working with other miscreants to recruit others like him for their own pleasure. I am not sure what degree of fairness you believe he should be accorded, but regardless of his popularity (or lack thereof) and or his film status, all that I recognize is his criminal activity and conviction. For me none of his prior exploits matter.

          • cainenyc

            I did not know he KNEW the minor was underage, nor was I aware (if it is true) that he specifically set about trying to recruit other underage participants. I do however question your need to have the last word on this and the amount of time you are spending responding with the over done verbosity. Dozer strikes me as the kind of person whom if he were chocolate he would eat himself. That characteristic seems to be shared with some of the posters on here.

          • A.C.

            He did know the minor was underage and he encourage the young man to actively recruit, those were facts established at trial. As far a my response, I was under the impression that we were engaged in a conversation of sorts, thus necessitating the need to respond. I have time as I am awaiting a decision in court and before this last volley from you, this exchange passed as a somewhat worthwhile way to pass that time. Whatever question you have about my alleged need to have the last word on this issue could easily be asked of you as you seem all to content to respond and continue to converse. As for the way that I choose to represent myself in writing, I assure you that that is a matter of style and not at all relevant to the conversation at hand. A lesser person would consider the mentioning of it somewhat passive aggressive, if not ad hominem. I will not question your motives though and simply note that you have said all that you would like to say on this topic and unless you intend to offer any other comment specifically related to this issue I will not respond to you either, presumptively. Oh, and as for the reference to individuals who think more highly of themselves than they out to, please note that I cannot speak for Mr. Dozer nor for the other posters on this board, but I do find it quite off putting when we start casting aspersions about perfect strangers.

          • cainenyc

            “ad hominem”. Thanks for proving my point.

          • A.C.

            And you mine sir!

          • gnormie

            it has come out that he told police he did not care if the child was underage…and that he and the other defendants charged in the case were using the boy to place spycams into locker rooms to watch other boys.

            So this kid lying about his age…not so relevant.

          • sxg

            This wasn’t entrapment because he kept going back for seconds and thirds. This wasn’t a one-time entrapment deal like an episode of To Catch A Predator, this was a relationship between the two that went on for months.

    • Dazzer

      Dear God – this is why I love this site.

      I’m a European and I get a clearer, better written, more erudite and pithier explanation of some parts of American law here than I do on any ‘broadsheet’ news or legal sites.

      I come to a gay porn blog and I learn more about the US legal system in one post than I’d ever get in a week of reading CNN or the SCOTUS blog.

      You have my most sincere and appreciative thanks, A.C.

      • A.C.

        You are sincerely welcome and know that I am humbled by your thanks. I believe that all the due praise though belongs to Zach for providing the forum and for following this story to its conclusion. It has been most satisfying for me.

      • Gendarme

        Then again, you’re reading anonymous posts. A.C could be a 13-year-old making it up as he goes along.

        • A 13 year old who writes better than most journalists in many major newspapers around the globe.

    • Trey LEone

      Girl,, what you doing here???
      Annalise needs you!!!!
      But undoubtedly, this was extremely insightful.
      What are your thoughts on the federal outcome of the court case in April?

  • James Withers

    No justice. No peace. Can’t wait for his fans to burn something down.

    • Puleez he does not have that many fans.

  • GN

    I don’t care how fast these little kids are nowadays with their sexting and Snapchats, you are an ADULT and should understand that it is wrong to sexually inopportune yourself of someone who’s not old enough to psycologically or emotionally understand the consequences of sex. it’s 100% your responsibility to say no, it’s not the damn kid’s.

    • Dazzer

      100 per cent agree.

      While the internet has provided young kids access to sexual imagery at a far earlier age than I experienced, he world wide web hasn’t done a damn thing to make young and vulnerable people more aware of their emotions or personal sexual knowledge.

      It is infinitely more difficult to mentor and parent children than it was 30 years ago – and that’s a problem that’s going to be a problem until adults and parents can find a new philosophy of how to protect the vulnerable – and a 14-year-old kid (no matter how vile) is still vulnerable in my view.

      But until we find a new way of policing children, we – as adults and parents of any sexual persuasion – have a direct responsibility to new generations to protect them by policing fellow adults.

      I know adults seducing underage kids is wrong. I expect any other adult to know it’s wrong. And if an adult takes advantage of a youthful person below the age of consent, that adult can expect no sympathy from me.

  • Randall

    He’s cute, that’s too bad.

  • Alan Keddie

    Next Monday 30th March? That’s the first day of my week off work.

  • gnormie

    why does one charge say 8-11 year older…is there another victim?

    • BoomPow

      In this case, I think it just means Dozier was 8-11 years older than the victim which is what is being used to determine the severity of the charge. In other words, the closer in age you are to the victim, the less severe the charges.

      • sxg

        8-11 years difference? I thought Dozer was 32 and the victim was 14 or 15?

  • BoomPow

    Everybody has their demons and if you want to succumb to drug addiction, that’s your personal business. That doesn’t mean you’re allowed to shed your inhibitions on a meth fueled sex bender, and drag underage boys along for the ride. Everybody knows right from wrong at Doziers age, and if you choose to ignore the laws because of your own selfish needs, you deserve everything you get.

  • Rickster Rickster

    do please keep us informed on future developments.

  • asby

    Lets just say he is screwed…Being gay…doing porn and now being labeled a child molester…..I am pretty sure the unpleasantries of being in prison will be pretty bad for him…He probably should of gone the way his BF did…..As bad as that sounds being labeled a child molester in prison in the worst thing you can be…Toss on the gay and the porn and the HIV….He will probably never be in general population

    • sxg

      Considering how much he loved to get fucked bareback by anything that moves, I think he’s in heaven. He’ll certainly be everyone’s favorite bitch bottom. Unless they divide him and put him on the gay side of prison, then he’ll be miserable and surrounded by mostly queens.

      • asby

        But with the way prison works….he will be known as a child molester…no one will want to associate with him…the prisoners don’t care about the details of the case….being a convicted child molester is the worst thing you can be in prison…and generally the gaurds will let it slip that he did gay porn and is hiv poz…..he will probably have to be in segregation for his own saftey

        • sxg

          I hear that every time but I don’t know if that’s true anymore. And if it is true, I don’t think they’ll treat him as bad as they would if he molested a 7 year old boy. If the prison he goes to has a gay side to it they would group him with that side for his safety rather than keep him in isolation forever.

          • He will definitely be isolated due to his crime, and “celebrity” status. The state and the Feds don’t want to end up getting sued because he got shanked.

      • James Withers

        Prison as heaven? WTF?

  • CBW

    it’s absolutely unfathomable that this miscreant still has people making excuses for him and blaming his victim. He’ll get what’s coming to him and like other sexual predators it will be richly deserved.

  • Orlando Chan

    This man is sick and needs to be in jail for a long time. How could Dozer have bareback sex with a 14 year old knowing that he was HIV positive????

  • Pingback: Mike Dozer, Charged with Sex Abuse of Minor by PA, Found Guilty | Headlines.XXX()

  • Pingback: Ex-Gay Adult Film Star Mike Dozer Convicted on State Charges for Sex With 14 Year-Old Boy | JRL Charts()

  • Why do I feel like I need to be doused in bleach and scrubbed down with a wire brush each time I gaze into Mike Dozer’s vacant eyes?

    Prison is too good for this fool.

  • Pingback: Breaking News: Mike Dozer Found Guilty In Child Rape Charges! | Guy Video Sex()

  • Kalcen

    It’s such bullshit. Child molestation laws need to be updated for reality.

    Boys hit puberty around 12 and from that point on are constantly looking for sex, it’s just a matter of time. I first had sex at 15 and the other person was in their 30s. It doesn’t mean I was raped. I was horny, I was looking for sex, and I got what I was looking for.

    Mother nature determines when we are ready to start having sex, not our government. We all don’t magically become ready for sex the day we turn 18. This is ridiculous.

  • Gage Blyth

    why the fuck are you people saying this shit about him yes he fucked up but we all do i may be 15 but he was the greatest uncle i have ever had for a majority of my life he and paul were like fathers to me. So i have one question? Are we sure you haters arent the real monsters?