Kraft Orchids Case - Prosecuters Want a Tug Rule?

[venecol]

Motion to prevent release of videos filed by 12 different law firms representing 15 defendants.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

Not sure where you get blackmail from since the taping was done to investigate crimes, such as trafficking and indenture servitude of young women being forced to perform sex acts.

The constitution and the judiciary of the US disagree.

If you believe this 1984 style surveillance is a "reasonable" search under the 4th amendment, I don't know what to tell you. Some hayseed judge in a backwash FL court signing a warrant doesn't make it okay.

 

[DarrylS]

It seems as though the Fla AG and Law Enforcement Officials are making veiled threats with release of the videos, not sure why they would do that except to try to coerce Kraft into accepting the deal already offered or they have a really crappy case and still are intent on further embarrassing the biggest fish available..

If the case is dismissed or they drop it, why would they even consider this??

FYI I think what Kraft did was really stupid and the embarrassment and shame for him and his family, far outweighs any penalties of the Court. No matter what happens that tape will be leaked someday....

Not sure the strategy by the AG & Law Enforcement to keep on releasing info; proposed deal offer & threat of releasing the video's is happening, seems like an effort to save face in this alleged criminal activity.

 

[Ring 6]

You're a liar. Period.


Kibbey contends that none of the customers had any knowledge of human trafficking and that no evidence has yet come to light in the case demonstrating "anything other than consensual sex acts between two adults." He says he believes police used a false human-trafficking pretext to wrongfully obtain the warrant, which has yet to be unsealed, so they could arrest customers.

"If the basis for the warrant was human trafficking... the warrant is suspect and will ultimately be struck down upon further review by the courts," Kibbey says.

Robert Kraft Might Beat Criminal Charges Due to Police Overreach and Privacy Issues

No one should ever believe another thing you post. It's obvious you will outright lie to continue your "I'm never wrong!" pathology.

So when I say he warrants were for trafficking and you post the attorney saying the warrants aren’t valid because they going no trafficking you really don’t understand what that means?
Your post literally says I am right.

Seriously what are you talking about?
I post about the warrants being issued to investigate trafficking because, well every report at all made about the case says that was the purpose in the warrants. You get your panties in a bunch and call me a liar for saying that because the defense attorney is arguing that the warrant is invalid because the basis for the warrant was human trafficking and they didn’t prove human trafficking.
The lawyer literally confirmed exactly what I said. If I am lying (which is an idiotic comment because stating the facts as I understand them isn’t lying) and the warrant wasn’t for trafficking why did the lawyer say it was? Is he lying?

 

[Triumph]

If you believe this 1984 style surveillance is a "reasonable" search under the 4th amendment, I don't know what to tell you. Some hayseed judge in a backwash FL court signing a warrant doesn't make it okay.

This could go all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Our Bob

 

[Ring 6]

If you believe this 1984 style surveillance is a "reasonable" search under the 4th amendment, I don't know what to tell you. Some hayseed judge in a backwash FL court signing a warrant doesn't make it okay.

1984 surveillance means surveilllimg everyone regardless of probable cause. This surveillance was approved by the court based upon probable cause.
But just so I am clear, you believe that surveillance should never, ever be used to investigate crime?

 

[Ring 6]

You're a liar. Period.


Kibbey contends that none of the customers had any knowledge of human trafficking and that no evidence has yet come to light in the case demonstrating "anything other than consensual sex acts between two adults." He says he believes police used a false human-trafficking pretext to wrongfully obtain the warrant, which has yet to be unsealed, so they could arrest customers.

"If the basis for the warrant was human trafficking... the warrant is suspect and will ultimately be struck down upon further review by the courts," Kibbey says.

Robert Kraft Might Beat Criminal Charges Due to Police Overreach and Privacy Issues

No one should ever believe another thing you post. It's obvious you will outright lie to continue your "I'm never wrong!" pathology.

What do you think the warrant was for?

 

[Triumph]

It’s either sheer luck... or you read one of the dozens of articles over the last month or so that gave Kraft’s best strategy for winning his court case.

It really doesn’t take a genius to predict the #1 defense strategy of a guilty client is to try to get the evidence ruled inadmissible.

And to put the Jupiter PD under the microscope.And to paint the FLA courts as out of control and recklessly not interpreting the law correctly.

Florida law enforcement doesnt know it yet, but they are about to go on trial and not Bob Kraft.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

1984 surveillance means surveilllimg everyone regardless of probable cause. This surveillance was approved by the court based upon probable cause.
But just so I am clear, you believe that surveillance should never, ever be used to investigate crime?

Somewhat off topic, but . . . do you ever sleep?

Anyways, sure video surveillance is perfectly fine under some circumstances. I have problems with how it was used here.

If they had probable cause to believe that prostitution was taking place at a local massage parlor, they can handle it by sending in an undercover who can call in the troops when he's offered a sex act. There's no legitimate reason for ongoing surveillance; it's just a cash grab.

As for the human trafficking part, I haven't heard anything yet to support that claim. Evidence that the women working there didn't get coffee breaks and sometimes slept over night at the place isn't proof of anything other than it was a crappy place to work.

 

[Triumph]

Oh and by the way, whether Kraft gets out of the misdemeanor or not, he’s going to get sanctioned by the NFL, and it will be done after the video is inevitably released.

Believe me, I am not happy about being right about this and a cannot understand why he did this, damaging both his own reputation and the franchise’s.

Terrible.

Jerry Richardson had to sell the Carolina Panthers for allegations of sexual harassment.

The owners meeting is this Sunday. Maybe Kraft can make some deals with some of the owners to not vote to remove him if we come to that juncture. But, the storm could be just beginning assuming Kraft were allowed to stay on as an NFL owner because of outside forces protesting a soft sentence. See Ray Rice.

Guilty or nay, Bob Kraft already has a lot going against him in the court of public opinion.

Rich
White Privilege
Winning - everyone hates a winner.

 

[Ring 6]

Somewhat off topic, but . . . do you ever sleep?

Anyways, sure video surveillance is perfectly fine under some circumstances. I have problems with how it was used here.

If they had probable cause to believe that prostitution was taking place at a local massage parlor, they can handle it by sending in an undercover who can call in the troops when he's offered a sex act. There's no legitimate reason for ongoing surveillance; it's just a cash grab.

As for the human trafficking part, I haven't heard anything yet to support that claim. Evidence that the women working there didn't get coffee breaks and sometimes slept over night at the place isn't proof of anything other than it was a crappy place to work.

You are all over the page.

Everything we have seen says the warrant for the camera was to investigate trafficking not prostitution. So arguing a warrant to place a camera to surveil prostitution isn’t relevant unless the warrant was for prostitution which we have every reason to believe it wasn’t.
Arguing that there wasn’t evidence of trafficking is premature at best because the facts the warrant is based upon are not available. The judge felt they were and the law says the judge is the one to make that call. The argument that the warrant wasn’t legit hinges on the facts we don’t know being specious AND the judge being incompetent which while possible doesn’t really seem likely.

Btw your version of the evidence differs (or has been softened) from what I read. I’ve read they slept there, on the massage tables, all the time, and were moved from location to location against their will, and of course were engaging in prostitution.

And to answer your question, unfortunately, last night I didn’t sleep hardly at all, having tweaked my back and being awoken all night long by stiffness and pain, finally giving up hope of sleep by 5. Thanks for asking.

 

[Bill Lee]

Jerry Richardson had to sell the Carolina Panthers for allegations of sexual harassment.

Holy false equivalence, Batman! Krafty Bob was visiting a massage parlor that was an undercover whore house, Richardson was sexually and racially harassing his own employees at their work place which was a NFL franchise. A bit of a difference, at least in my book.

 

[venecol]

Robert Kraft’s lawyer ‘surprised’ after request to keep spa tapes private is denied

 

[Bill Lee]

And this quote is exactly why I’ve been saying the PD may be the ones who get taken down here. Kraft’s attorneys are basically going to demand an investigation of this PD’s conduct and possible abuse of the warrant. Sure, it could be posturing, but by the sounds of it they are not looking for just innocence; they are looking for heads on platters. I don’t think a statement of this magnitude is made unless they really think this is an abnormally bad and illegal investigation. Citizens have rights just like police. We know what Kraft did. If the PD did what it appears they did, then what they did was they are the ones who will be paying for this. This could very well become an internal police investigation. Everything about what’s been published looks like a horrible manipulation of the judicial system and it’s granted scope of a warrant.

Jupiter PD wanted a big fish and now they're gonna wish they didn't catch such a big one. Kraft has enough money to discover and reveal all their mistakes. Citizens have rights, but most of us don't have the kind of money it takes to protect our rights. Bob does.

This seems to be heading for a "mutually assured destruction" scenario: The police threaten to leak the HJ video, the Kraft team threatens to show how incompetent the police are in court. Who blinks first?

 

[farn]

Looks like there were missteps and that is embarrassing for the PD (kudos to them for adding “pretty ugly” to the narrative, well played).

But regardless of outcome, everyone’s heard of the event (media was all over this) and though the video being released would significantly add to Kraft’s own embarrassment, damage has been done. And to RK, I suspect his reputation is extremely important. I suspect he believes people see him as a cool good guy. I’ve not been one of them for years. May he burn as brightly as I wanted him to burn at the end of the 2014 season.

 

[BTTA]

No
As was explained the law has exceptions which clearly rape would qualify as.

OK, thanks. The professionals working to end sex trafficking define any sex act with a person who has been trafficked as rape. So, if it is proven (or even highly suspicious) that the person who was servicing Kraft (or anyone on any of these videos from this massage parlor) were doing so against their will (sex trafficking), then the video won't be released.

 

[Bill Lee]

Robert Kraft’s lawyer ‘surprised’ after request to keep spa tapes private is denied

Article says:

Kraft’s lead attorney William Burck revealed that the West Palm Beach State Attorney has refused to agree to the request for a protective order over the evidence in the case, including the hidden video footage of the men inside the Orchids of Asia Spa.

I don't think the attorney is surprised at all. Granting such requests is routine, but in this case the key weapon the prosecutor has is the threat of the tapes leaking, and of course they aren't going to voluntarily give that up.

I'm no lawyer, but I can imagine this is just round one of the battle.

 

[Ring 6]

Jupiter PD wanted a big fish and now they're gonna wish they didn't catch such a big one. Kraft has enough money to discover and reveal all their mistakes. Citizens have rights, but most of us don't have the kind of money it takes to protect our rights. Bob does.

This seems to be heading for a "mutually assured destruction" scenario: The police threaten to leak the HJ video, the Kraft team threatens to show how incompetent the police are in court. Who blinks first?

I’m not understanding the sensationalizing of this.
Kraft is charged with a misdemeanor and rejected the plea bargain that was offered.
His attorneys are filing motions to have evidence ruled inadmissible. If they win on enough of those appeals the case will fall apart and kraft will not be convicted. If they do not he will go to trial.
What am I missing in all of these comments about him putting the police department in trial or embarrassing them or getting them all fired or “demanding an investigation”.

It’s a misdemeanor case within motions filed to question the validity of the evidence. If the police are ruled to have gathered evidence inappropriately then either the charges get dropped or the verdict is not guilty. Where are these other consequences coming from?

 

[Ring 6]

Article says:

I don't think the attorney is surprised at all. Granting such requests is routine, but in this case the key weapon the prosecutor has is the threat of the tapes leaking, and of course they aren't going to voluntarily give that up.

I'm no lawyer, but I can imagine this is just round one of the battle.

This is just lawyering public relations. There is no need for the prosecution to sign on to the defense request. I imagine there may be reasons for them not to, but I don’t know. Publicly stating that they didn’t is just a pr move to make them look antagonistic.
Focusing on the chaff rather than the wheat.

 

[venecol]

Looks like AJ is finally starting to see the light and for first time admitting there is a possibility cops may have done something wrong. This in contrast to 1000 posts that said cops had probable cause, have no reason to lie and judges order is correct because, well he's a judge. He finally gets it. Wow