Kraft Orchids Case - Prosecuters Want a Tug Rule?

[ivanvamp]

Why Is Porn Legal But Prostitution Isn't?

Hahahahaha that's hilarious. Quite the rationalization. (not by you, Tony...this isn't a shot at you)

 

[Antdawg]

I do not understand your logic though. How would the LEO expect Kraft to squeal about soliciting a prostitute without revealing anything about the solicitation or the Spa visit during the stop? If that's what they're were hoping for they would have had to say something about the Spa visit during the stop.

Cops get a lot of stupid people to confess on the spot out of intimidation and fear. Put yourself in Kraft's place. You were just at a place that you likely knew as a "rub and tug". You just paid for sex, which is illegal. Immediately after you leave that place, you're pulled over by police. Lots of people freak out in that situation, because as soon as the police lights go on, they feel like they're busted. So, it doesn't take much for the cops to get confessions from johns in these situations. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. If you read about this sting, you'll see cops arrested a lot of the johns after confessions when making similar traffic stops right after the occurrence. With Kraft, obviously they did not get a confession. Cops will often, as we see in the case of Kraft, hold on to their cards as long as they can. So, they wouldn't necessarily reveal their hand to Kraft on the stop. There are a lot of various tactics used to get confessions.

I'm of the mind that unless Kraft was terribly drunk or on a lot of medication, there's not a chance in hell he goes back the very next morning if the cops directly asked him why he was at the spa, let alone ask him if he paid for sex. Just put yourself in his place. I think it is more likely that the cops made up a flimsy excuse to pull him over (which is the crux of this particular side debate), so much so that Kraft felt safe returning to the spa the next day. I think if the cops brought up anything at all about the spa, Kraft doesn't go back, because in the back of Kraft's mind, he's probably already worried that's why they stopped him in the first place.

There's also the presumption of innocence card here Kraft still holds. That is, if he truly was doing nothing illegal, then he had no reason to fear returning to the spa the next morning, even after the traffic stop by police. Not only did he maintain his innocence during the stop, but the next day as well by returning. He could easily use this traffic stop as ammunition to say "if I was doing something illegal, you think I'd go back to that place after the police stopped me?"

I'm just pointing out there are a lot of ways Kraft could potentially wiggle out of this. Since we don't know exactly what was said by police at the stop, we don't really know what was going through Kraft's mind, we have to make some of our own observation here. That said, I still maintain the fact that cops did not arrest Kraft at the traffic stop hurts their case. They already had their video. It's almost like they had to go back to the shop and make a judgment call on whether to arrest him or not.

 

[Joker]

Prostitution is illegal because of guys like Al Capone and Lucky Luciano

 

[moosekill]

Not going to read through 140 pages.

Not a lawyer, but here goes. If you leave a bar and drive perfectly fine, don't speed, no headlights out, and a police officer pulls you over, finds you are drunk and arrests you, it will be thrown out of court. Leaving a bar is not probably cause for stopping you.

So, leaving a massage parlor is the same thing. Especially if you are a passenger. The police officer has no right to pull you over unless you are doing something wrong. It is illegal, and anything gained will be thrown out. Furthermore, even if the driver was speeding, the officer doesn't have the legal right to ask for Kraft's information, he was the passenger.

 

[maust]

Prostitution is illegal because of guys like Al Capone and Lucky Luciano

But legal in Nevada, cause guys like @fnordcircle

 

[Antdawg]

Not going to read through 140 pages.

Not a lawyer, but here goes. If you leave a bar and drive perfectly fine, don't speed, no headlights out, and a police officer pulls you over, finds you are drunk and arrests you, it will be thrown out of court. Leaving a bar is not probably cause for stopping you.

So, leaving a massage parlor is the same thing. Especially if you are a passenger. The police officer has no right to pull you over unless you are doing something wrong. It is illegal, and anything gained will be thrown out. Furthermore, even if the driver was speeding, the officer doesn't have the legal right to ask for Kraft's information, he was the passenger.

So, you mean the police may have "botched" this one?

 

[Patjew]

PJ...you've traveled in the orient extensively...ever hear of the Sun Yee On triad?

I have, but never ran into them personally. Those triads ain't no joke.

 

[Patjew]

But legal in Nevada, cause guys like @fnordcircle

Hmmm, I didn't know that guys like @fnordcircle. Cool!

 

[maust]

Hmmm, I didn't know that guys like @fnordcircle. Cool!

It was really rather a broad statement meant to imply guys who understand and embrace their hedonistic tendencies. Our very own @fnordcircle is of course in a league of his own and one should not confuse the phrase 'guys like fnord' as meaning they are anywhere near as adept (or pliable) as close personal friend of James White, @fnordcircle.

 

[moosekill]

So, you mean the police may have "botched" this one?

Well, look at it another way. This makes headlines, but worst case they are misdemeanors. In the grand scheme of things they aren't much different than speeding tickets. So, how much effort do they really put into this from the start.

If they have 100 johns, and get convictions on 50% they are probably happy. The big thing they want is to scare the people who are using this "service" and hope to keep them from partaking in the future.

 

[Antdawg]

Well, look at it another way. This makes headlines, but worst case they are misdemeanors. In the grand scheme of things they aren't much different than speeding tickets. So, how much effort do they really put into this from the start.

If they have 100 johns, and get convictions on 50% they are probably happy. The big thing they want is to scare the people who are using this "service" and hope to keep them from partaking in the future.

Sure, but to videotape the sessions over a period of 4 months, while the women they're supposedly protecting are still being exploited.. all that required a lot of work. If they're happy with a 50% conviction rate after doing all that, it just speaks even more to the absurdity of the entire operation.

 

[XLIX]

Ok, so they pulled him over to ID the man on the tape. Great. Why not arrest him then if he was a suspect? I'll get to that later. The whole point of the debate over the veracity of the traffic stop is whether the LEO had probable cause to do so. I don't know the letter of the law per se, but I would assume that when said traffic stop is made, the police are required to present their probable cause at that point in time. I mean, the LEO can't just pull a car over, walk up to the driver's side window and say "give me your ID, now." They're typically required to cite reason for stoppage. I'm assuming either Kraft or the driver would have been curious enough to at least ask and force the LEO to reveal his probable cause. So, what was the reason cited? Do we know? We know the reason cited wasn't they'd just seen him leave a spa where they suspect illegal activity was occurring, because Kraft doesn't return the next day if that happened. So what reason did they give to request Kraft's ID and make the stop?

You don't have the first clue what was or wasn't said during the traffic stop, and you don't have the first clue what Bob Kraft would or wouldn't do based on his conversations with the police the previous night.

Yeah, it's pretty moronic to go to a rub joint, get pulled over on your way out, then go back the very next day. Yet that's what happened.

 

[XLIX]

Because fat chance Kraft returns the very next morning if they asked him point blank "dude, did you just pay for a tuggie?" I mean seriously, if Kraft is going to be that brazen, then he deserves whatever Goodell throws at him. That would be a flagrant middle finger to law enforcement. He wasn't questioned about the spa.

I doubt he was asked "dude, did you just pay for a tuggie?"

He was probably asked "where are you coming from? what were you doing there?"

 

[XLIX]

To this point:

Why is prostitution illegal but making porn films is not? In both cases, people are getting paid to have sex. Why does filming it and selling the film make it legal?

Or we can look at what George Carlin said on the matter:

"Selling's legal and f***ing's legal, so why isn't selling f***ing legal??"

 

[ivanvamp]

Or we can look at what George Carlin said on the matter:

"Selling's legal and f***ing's legal, so why isn't selling f***ing legal??"

Or at least be consistent. If it’s illegal to get paid for sex not in front of a camera then it should be illegal to get paid for sex in front of one. Or if it’s legal to get paid for sex in front of a camera it should be legal to get paid for sex not in front of one.

The “artistic” crap is just that. A crap justification. Just be consistent. (Not you...I mean the law)

 

[XLIX]

Not going to read through 140 pages.

Not a lawyer, but here goes. If you leave a bar and drive perfectly fine, don't speed, no headlights out, and a police officer pulls you over, finds you are drunk and arrests you, it will be thrown out of court. Leaving a bar is not probably cause for stopping you.

And yet oftentimes you see sobriety checkpoints (legal in some states, not all) which pull people over at random to test sobriety. Absolutely no probable cause there, just random detainment of citizens.

So, leaving a massage parlor is the same thing.

No, it isn't the same as leaving a bar when that massage parlor is a known house of prostitution.

Especially if you are a passenger. The police officer has no right to pull you over unless you are doing something wrong. It is illegal, and anything gained will be thrown out. Furthermore, even if the driver was speeding, the officer doesn't have the legal right to ask for Kraft's information, he was the passenger.

A cop most certainly has the right to ask anyone for their ID. The question is what legal rights does the citizen have to refuse it.

I am just speculating, but I'd bet when the cop asked Kraft for his ID, Kraft gave it to him without complaint.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Not going to read through 140 pages.

Not a lawyer, but here goes. If you leave a bar and drive perfectly fine, don't speed, no headlights out, and a police officer pulls you over, finds you are drunk and arrests you, it will be thrown out of court. Leaving a bar is not probably cause for stopping you.

So, leaving a massage parlor is the same thing. Especially if you are a passenger. The police officer has no right to pull you over unless you are doing something wrong. It is illegal, and anything gained will be thrown out. Furthermore, even if the driver was speeding, the officer doesn't have the legal right to ask for Kraft's information, he was the passenger.

There's a big difference -- Kraft was seen leaving a specific place where illegal activities were outright known to be taking place on an ongoing basis. That's not true of a generic bar.

How much of a difference that makes I'll leave to the lawyers, but I suspect it makes a meaningful difference.

 

[moosekill]

There's a big difference -- Kraft was seen leaving a specific place where illegal activities were outright known to be taking place on an ongoing basis. That's not true of a generic bar.

How much of a difference that makes I'll leave to the lawyers, but I suspect it makes a meaningful difference.

No, I don't think it actually does. This was a legitimate business that was allowing illegal activities to go on. I am sure some people went there to get massages without a happy ending. I guess we will find out eventually.

 

[Antdawg]

You don't have the first clue what was or wasn't said during the traffic stop, and you don't have the first clue what Bob Kraft would or wouldn't do based on his conversations with the police the previous night.

I doubt he was asked "dude, did you just pay for a tuggie?"

He was probably asked "where are you coming from? what were you doing there?"

You got from the top quote to the bottom quote in the span of minutes. If I don't have the first clue, neither do you, yet in the very next post, you're telling us what he wasn't asked and what he was asked. Nobody knows. We're clearly speculating based on what we have.

That said, if he was truly asked ""where are you coming from? what were you doing there?", not only would Kraft be extremely dumb to go right back to the mire the next morning, the question would be why the cops didn't make the arrest then if they had video evidence which answered the two questions you posed. Kraft didn't have to confess at the traffic stop for them to arrest. Why even make the stop and question if you're not going to arrest? If you've got the video evidence in hand already?

 

[Chevrolet]

Let's assume that Kraft's lawyers get the case thrown out. Let's also make a bigger assumption that Goodell does not punish him.

I would be very curious to know how people will feel about Kraft moving forward.

A. Opinion not changed, he was not found guilty of anything illegal, No big deal. He saved the Patriots for NE and brought 6 super bowl championships, cut the guy some slack

B. Terrible judgment, embarassing for organization, arrogance on display, Have less respect for him but he should stay as CEO and start to transition to Jonathan

C. Pervert, Immoral, unethical, guilty as hell, got off on technicality, evidence of a deep character flaw, as CEO of an important company he has to be held to a high standard...time for him to step aside ASAP

D. Since Myra died he has not seemd right, get him a medical and psychiatric check up, reserve judgment till then

I choose B