Interesting stuff. Thanks.
Some questions for you.
You say victims will testify but I've read numerous times that they often don't for fear of repercussions to them or their families living back home in Asia. So how often have you seen the women working in brothels testify?
Ex-FBI Agent: Robert Kraft Case in Florida Reminds Me of Our Ann Arbor Investigation
Do you see any evidence of the LE overstepping their bounds? To me it seems they were justified in their suspicions of a human trafficking case and therefore justified getting a warrant for human trafficking. Is installing cameras under those grounds an overreach?
Based on your post it does seem like the Palm Beach LE went about it the wrong way if they were trying to crack down on a human trafficking ring but that doesn't mean they went about it illegally imo.
Thanks again.
Law enforcement can offer broader grants of protection that extend to families. Those discussions touch on the less wholesome aspects of law and order - what do we get for our money? If you are important enough to the case, then you can get a bunch. If you are less important, then it may only be you protected. Victims, with or without attorneys, have to weigh risks against often less than concrete assurances before cooperating. It usually comes down to whether you trust a particular prosecutor to do what is necessary. Victims don't always have attorneys, so that can be a scary process.
I have read enough police affidavits to not label those gospel. Affidavit stories may change substantially after cross-examination in preliminary hearings, and the described contents of videos (which are not shown early on) may be way off the mark. Why? Because those documents are used to sell judges on an arrest or search warrant. They are not for juries. They may be used in cross-examination to attack credibility.
My concerns, in the few stories I have read about this topic:
1. Presence of video (if it was suspected human trafficking as suggested, then nobody would video the victims being victimized - What exactly would that video be expected produce as evidence in regard to victim status or knowledge of that status? If the belief was underage victims might be involved, then the cops would be producing child pornography. Not happening. They seize that stuff. They don't make it.). If this was just a local brothel sting, then it makes a little more sense. That video would generally be sound as evidence against anyone without a property right to the establishment. ;
2. Vehicle stop (reasonable suspicion works for a stop, but I'm not sure on how that works for a passenger John who has allegedly already committed the offense - a Texas law requiring individuals to pony up identification on request was shot down - and if there was video of this well known public figure, why the need to identify through a vehicle stop? In the mix, likely none of that matters as you can't suppress the body - the identity of the person being investigated. In the most egregious violations, that might get a case dismissed but generally nothing happens. More just weird to me.)
3. Timing. This major human trafficking investigation (usually requiring many months or even years) concluded within 30 days of Kraft appearing as a John? Do we label this conclusion with a misdemeanor charge a coincidence? Presumably, the moment an investigation goes public the big fish are no longer a target. That makes this sound less a concern of the potential victims of human trafficking, and more a PR opportunity that has been grossly mischaracterized in order to paint the individual as more nefarious.
"Perp walks" are standard. The same applies to press releases. I don't like them, but they occasionally serve the end of assuring the public that the police are doing their job in arresting the bad people. Do I believe law enforcement agents were conducting a human trafficking investigation here? Highly unlikely. Do I believe they used that characterization when presented with a celebrity violation of traditionally lesser variety in order to sound more grandiose? Yes. Is Kraft liked in Florida? No. Does adding that element create better national media interest? Yes. If this were a jury matter, then could you find an untainted jury in all of Florida after this media interest? No. Is that a problem? Yes, if your true concern is the validity of our system of justice and not your 15 minutes of fame in shaming an unpopular character in your voting district. But if you live in a place where you and others need the vote to keep your job, then you might be tempted to dance for the media.
Personally, barring major law enforcement misconduct tantamount to framing Kraft, I believe Kraft did it. I won't feel sorry for him however this turns out. The reality is prostitution is everywhere and solicitation charges are common (and relatively minor) in the justice system. He should enjoy the Eugene Robinson and Warren Sapp experience, as that is what he likely did. Not a fan of the law enforcement visual here, but it doesn't rise to the "set up an innocent guy" level of concern for me.
) earlier on this thread, Kraft -- not being the driver -- couldn't be forced to hand over his ID in a traffic stop. However, whether through ignorance, not caring, or whatever, he made the decision to hand it over even though he didn't have to. So assuming the traffic stop is held to be legal, that identification of him will be legal, too.
