Kraft Orchids Case - Prosecuters Want a Tug Rule?

[A Defiant Goose]

BTW here's what I (100% hunch, nothing to back it up) think Kraft's argument/defense will be. Whatever happened in the massage room was based on consent and completely voluntary. The only "crime" here is he gave her money, which would be construed as him paying for whatever **** went down, when really it could just be a tip for the massage. The sexual **** was separate from it. I mean, prove him wrong. The sex was free, the money was for the massage. Your move, prosecutors.

 

[A Defiant Goose]

I'd trade Krafty Bob jail time for Receiver who can catch 70 passes next year and convert third downs

You'd trade your own mother in for a chance to complain all year long about how much the team sucks so that's not saying much

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

That is an argument that fails far, far more often than not. Judges aren't morons. They aren't going to buy the notion "hey, I was just tipping her for such a great massage, the hand job was free because she liked me so darn much!"

That's true but you can't criminally convict someone for something they "probably" did. The State has to prove this BARD. Without audio, how can they prove that Kraft actually solicited absent an admission?

 

[203Pat]

That’s hardly a Florida-only thing. It sure sounds like a pre-trial diversionary program very similar to what they offered Ray Rice (whose crime was quite a bit worse than Kraft’s).

Granted I’m no lawyer by any means most people on Twitter (including former lawyer Florio) says that is an unusual requirement from the court.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

BTW here's what I (100% hunch, nothing to back it up) think Kraft's argument/defense will be. Whatever happened in the massage room was based on consent and completely voluntary. The only "crime" here is he gave her money, which would be construed as him paying for whatever **** went down, when really it could just be a tip for the massage. The sexual **** was separate from it. I mean, prove him wrong. The sex was free, the money was for the massage. Your move, prosecutors.

The only thing that could sink that argument is testimony from the woman or audio of the incident.

 

[Deus Irae]

Granted I’m no lawyer by any means most people on Twitter (including former lawyer Florio) says that is an unusual requirement from the court.

Use your Google Fu to look up:

Massachusetts CWOF (continuance without finding)

 

[203Pat]

No offense meant to you, but you're way off base on this.

I very well could be. I am going by people (ones I would hope/assume reached out before posting) on Twitter claiming this is an unusual clause.

 

[XLIX]

The defense will produce numerous people to testify that Mr. Kraft is a generous tipper. As generous to people who carry his bags to his hotel room or cut his hair as he was to those massage therapists.

And how many of those people who cut his hair and carry his bags also jerk him off?

 

[203Pat]

Use your Google Fu to look up:

Massachusetts CWOF (continuance without finding)

Doesn’t it seem to fly in the face or reason? If you say you’re guilty you walk? I know the law is strange and nonsensical sometimes but this one just seems ridiculous.

 

[supafly]

I'd trade Krafty Bob jail time for Receiver who can catch 70 passes next year and convert third downs

Edelman, Edelman, d-backs be backpedalin.’

 

[Triumph]

After getting the gist of the offer (a course on prostitution, STD testing [LOL] and 100 hours of community service - this is the same thing as pleading guilty, not dismissing the charges), I revise my answer.

Bob's attorneys should call up the prosecutor and say as follows, "Obviously you have no case, or you're worried that videotape is getting suppressed. We'll agree that if you place the charges on file without a finding for one year (or two years if you think Bob isn't in danger of running afoul of the law) Bob will have no further charges and provided that happens, you will dismiss the charges after that one (or two) year period. If Bob gets tagged again for this type of offense during the operative period, then you can bring the charges forward and Bob will have to plead guilty then.

It's called placing a charge on file and I would be looking to do it (and yelling at my client that he'd better stay the heck away from any massage parlors) if I am smelling weakness in the prosecutor's case.

I believe the case vs Kraft is solid, but the State would rather avoid a long drawn out battle with Krafts HOF lawyers. They know every trick in the book. Everyone will be on trial but Kraft.

The video tape is not from police cameras. The massage Madam set her own cameras up and recorded the clientele. Maybe she had plans to black mail old Bob later on down the road.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Lived in Florida 9 years and that state is so ass backwards. Hee-haw kangaroo courts down there. Only in that stupid place would they think that makes any sense. “If you admit you would be guilty then we won’t charge you” unbelievable.

In what can only be considered a eerie coincidence, after you left was the precise moment Florida became a lot better (certainly no offense intended).

 

[Deus Irae]

Doesn’t it seem to fly in the face or reason? If you say you’re guilty you walk?

No

 

[supafly]

And how many of those people who cut his hair and carry his bags also jerk him off?

Sure, but if he’s been seen in other places with the 58 yr old woman, as reported, maybe his defense becomes more credible.

 

[XLIX]

That's true but you can't criminally convict someone for something they "probably" did. The State has to prove this BARD. Without audio, how can they prove that Kraft actually solicited absent an admission?

In many courtrooms, if you can prove (1) a sex act took place and (2) money changed hands, then that’s proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Judges are not stupid. They are not going to buy the old “I paid for her time, the sex was free!” defense.

 

[Triumph]

They wouldn't necessarily agree to do this, but they might offer you something more palatable than pleading "no lo contendere" (fancy Latin for "I don't contest the charges" which is akin to a guilty plea), which is really all they are offering.

In other words Kraft is guilty.

 

[maust]

How does Kraft go from categorically denying all those charges to taking a plea deal?

Kraft hasn't denied anything, a 'spokesperson' has

 

[203Pat]

No

I’m assuming you’re a lawyer, what is the reasoning behind this stipulation?

 

[203Pat]

In what can only be considered a eerie coincidence, after you left was the precise moment Florida became a lot better (certainly no offense intended).

I take you enjoy the bugs, heat, and mullets?

 

[Triumph]

Bob needs to hold out until post draft.

Godell can take more draft picks away if Kraft takes this deal. Im in favor of fighting these salacious charges against Mr Kraft who by the way is a pillar of the community.