Kraft Orchids Case - Prosecuters Want a Tug Rule?

[Ring 6]

This whole mess looks awful on both sides

How do you think a massage parlor operating as a brothel is supposed to look?
Ironically you have prostitutes and Johns commiting crimes and somehow people want to make it about the police.

 

[IllegalContact]

the whole thing makes me laugh.......it will be great to see him found guilty because any other result is boring

 

[IcyPatriot]

The prosecutor is not ****ing around.

 

[patfanken]

History lesson: A hundred years ago it was standard operating procedure for elected officials to empty the brothels and locking up the madams and whores just before elections. Then, after the election, with their heads held high, they'd claim the moral high ground, while at the same time ignoring the reopening of the sex trade. Wink wink, nod, nod.

Sex trafficking is a horrendous crime and deserves a spotlight. But that is NOT what happened here. What DID happen was an elected official who took a VERY old page from the Politicians' Book of Strategies, and abused it, apparently several times so far. Simple as that.

 

[Soliel]

How do you think a massage parlor operating as a brothel is supposed to look?
Ironically you have prostitutes and Johns commiting crimes and somehow people want to make it about the police.

Right bro, I agree. My problem has been mostly time line. You can not possibly justify waiting that long then moving on with a case like this. Why were they not busted the first time anything was recorded. But, of course, you will continue this obfuscation you have going on where nothing matters. You don’t mind at all about the rules and are actually on board with abuse of power as well as waiting until you had that many vids? Your argument falls apart right there. Your cool with them watching for months as crimes were commuted then on the other hand, you’ll attack kraft. He deserves that but why was this thing allowed to continue? Agreeing with that is asinine. It has the same merit to it as trying to argue that the cops wanted to record more murder videos so their case would be stronger. This is the very defenition of hypocrisy. And no, this is not a attack on you ok? I know you wouldn’t do it this way and would have shut it down the minute any crimes started. You wouldn’t wait for 30 murders. However, the stance you’ve taken is on board with out right corruption just because whatever it is might be true. That’s what I’m confused about with your argument

 

[venecol]

After this entire debacle is over, regardless of the outcome, and to show that I hold no grudges against anyone on this thread, I'm ready to contribute to a full table shower massage for Andy at whichever Asian massage spa of his liking.

Many of these strip centers have medical offices so if you research it, you may be able to find a spa in a center that also has a proctologist so you can get a colonic while you're there.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

History lesson: A hundred years ago it was standard operating procedure for elected officials to empty the brothels and locking up the madams and whores just before elections. Then, after the election, with their heads held high, they'd claim the moral high ground, while at the same time ignoring the reopening of the sex trade. Wink wink, nod, nod.

Sex trafficking is a horrendous crime and deserves a spotlight. But that is NOT what happened here. What DID happen was an elected official who took a VERY old page from the Politicians' Book of Strategies, and abused it, apparently several times so far. Simple as that.

Me love you posts long time!

 

[Biffins]

Not sure why everyone is riding the cops on this one. Let's assume they messed the case completely up. What does that have to do with whether Kraft is guilty or not? He's not being charged with sex trafficking and you have to ask yourself, "do I think he did it"? If you think he was dating this woman and decided the best place to go out for a date was at her place of business or he was at this seedy strip mall to get a massage, then more power to you. If you think he was up to something illegal, then what the cops did is purely a procedural issue. Either way, the issue is what he did or didn't do. Everything else is smoke and mirrors. He's paying his lawyer to redirect your attention to the legal aspect of it and away from Kraft's guilt or innocence.

Let's be clear, the cops could have done everything wrong and that may legally clear Kraft but that really isn't the issue. The procedural questions are what his team of lawyers wants you to focus on though and why he's paying for them. They aren't arguing that he didn't do it and they aren't arguing the morality of prostitution. They are focusing on the procedure and sex trafficking ro redirect your attention because that is where they want it.

Sorry I disagree. The law is not about what you did or didn’t do but how it can be proven in a court of law. You can’t say Kraft did something illegal and then say that we can’t prove it due to “procedural” issues. It’s not till you can prove it was illegal. Innocent till proven guilty. Civil rights and protections exist for a reason.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Sorry I disagree. The law is not about what you did or didn’t do but how it can be proven in a court of law. You can’t say Kraft did something illegal and then say that we can’t prove it due to “procedural” issues. It’s not till you can prove it was illegal. Innocent till proven guilty. Civil rights and protections exist for a reason.

Innocent in the eyes of the government until proven guilty. There is absolutely nothing wrong legally, ethically, morally, and practically with non-govt actors reaching a different decision, using a different standard of proof, and using all available evidence to make that decision even if the government is barred from using that evidence for government actions.

So yes, I can absolutely say that Kraft (or anyone else) did something illegal and it couldn't be proven due to procedural issues.

As an example, imagine that the cops were able to get clear, irrefutable evidence of someone brutally murdering someone else. But it turns out they got that evidence in violation of the 4th Amendment.

I am totally on board with the evidence being excluded from trial, even if it means the murderer goes free. I won't be happy about it, but the govt's feet must be held to the fire to protect the rights of us all.

But I'm also totally on board with calling the person a murderer whose crime was unable to be proven due to procedural issues, and I would never hire the person, would refuse to do business with the person, etc. And I bet 99.9% of you would do exactly the same.

 

[borg]

Many of these strip centers have medical offices so if you research it, you may be able to find a spa in a center that also has a proctologist so you can get a colonic while you're there.

A shower massage and a colonic for Andy should open his mind and body to any possibility.

Is there a hydraulic lift at this strip mall to pull the stick out first?

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

So yes, I can absolutely say that Kraft (or anyone else) did something illegal and it couldn't be proven due to procedural issues.

You haven't even heard the other side of the case yet but you are ABSOLUTELY certain Kraft did something illegal? I am betting that he did, sure, but there hasn't even been a trial or any actual information released. All we have are some quotes and press conferences. We have the police claiming that they have videos of him, that they ID's him, etc. None of that has been proven, not only in a legal setting, but to anyone, anywhere. I would be careful with ABSOLUTE certainty; that type of immediate reaction is what spawned Deflategate...an absolute certainty from the league, followed by the media, based on quotes and evidence later shown to be far from the truth.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

You haven't even heard the other side of the case yet but you are ABSOLUTELY certain Kraft did something illegal? I am betting that he did, sure, but there hasn't even been a trial or any actual information released. All we have are some quotes and press conferences. We have the police claiming that they have videos of him, that they ID's him, etc. None of that has been proven, not only in a legal setting, but to anyone, anywhere. I would be careful with ABSOLUTE certainty; that type of immediate reaction is what spawned Deflategate...an absolute certainty from the league, followed by the media, based on quotes and evidence later shown to be far from the truth.

Not to be pedantic but he did not quite say that (BOLD)
" I can absolutely say that Kraft (or anyone else) did something illegal and it couldn't be proven due to procedural issues."
Q said that he is free to SAY what he said and he absolutely could have and express an opinion about guilt, or, not. He & we are not held to the standards that our government, thankfully, is held to.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Not to be pedantic but he did not quite say that (BOLD)
" I can absolutely say that Kraft (or anyone else) did something illegal and it couldn't be proven due to procedural issues."
Q said that he is free to SAY what he said and he absolutely could have and express an opinion about guilt, or, not. He & we are not held to the standards that our government, thankfully, is held to.

Oh okay...thanks for clarifying. Never mind @QuantumMechanic

 

[Ring 6]

Right bro, I agree. My problem has been mostly time line. You can not possibly justify waiting that long then moving on with a case like this. Why were they not busted the first time anything was recorded.

What are you basing the belief that they waited a long time on? No one has reported how long the video surveillance lasted. How do I “justify” something if I don’t know the facts?

But, of course, you will continue this obfuscation you have going on where nothing matters. You don’t mind at all about the rules and are actually on board with abuse of power as well as waiting until you had that many vids?

I have never said I don’t mind about rules or am in board with abuse of power. In fact I feel very much the opposite. The fact that I won’t conclude something happened without facts does not mean I condone the made up version, it means I am saying you don’t gave facts.

Your argument falls apart right there. Your cool with them watching for months as crimes were commuted then on the other hand, you’ll attack kraft.

I have never said I am fine with then watching for months. No one has ever shown that they watched for months. When I know the facts, I will decide how I feel about what really happened.
Refusing to make wild assumptions doesn’t mean I would feel one way it another if those assumptions were true.

He deserves that but why was this thing allowed to continue? Agreeing with that is asinine.

We don’t know how long it continued. How could we agree it was too long or not if we don’t know how long it is.

It has the same merit to it as trying to argue that the cops wanted to record more murder videos so their case would be stronger. This is the very defenition of hypocrisy. And no, this is not a attack on you ok? I know you wouldn’t do it this way and would have shut it down the minute any crimes started. You wouldn’t wait for 30 murders. However, the stance you’ve taken is on board with out right corruption just because whatever it is might be true. That’s what I’m confused about with your argument

Please explain what stance you are attributing to me because nothing you have said is a stance I have taken, posted or argued.

It’s like we are in a theater, you yell fire, I say “where I don’t see any fire” and you accuse me of “being in board” with burning down theaters.

 

[Tony2046]

You haven't even heard the other side of the case yet but you are ABSOLUTELY certain Kraft did something illegal? I am betting that he did, sure, but there hasn't even been a trial or any actual information released. All we have are some quotes and press conferences. We have the police claiming that they have videos of him, that they ID's him, etc. None of that has been proven, not only in a legal setting, but to anyone, anywhere. I would be careful with ABSOLUTE certainty; that type of immediate reaction is what spawned Deflategate...an absolute certainty from the league, followed by the media, based on quotes and evidence later shown to be far from the truth.

I agree.

She was just trying to fix his jammed zipper.

 

[venecol]

“In sum, the worst offenses that jump out from this record are not those committed by one or another masseuse or patron whose massage allegedly included (a) consensual sexual act,” Goldberger wrote. “Far more worrisome than any alleged misdemeanor are the astonishing lengths to which law enforcement went in order to orchestrate a calculated, systematic campaign to blow past established constitutional limits.”

Police used fake bomb threat to install cameras in Robert Kraft sex spa case

 

[Froob]

John Henry is a jackass

 

[IcyPatriot]

John Henry is a jackass

Dr. Creepy

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

“In sum, the worst offenses that jump out from this record are not those committed by one or another masseuse or patron whose massage allegedly included (a) consensual sexual act,” Goldberger wrote. “Far more worrisome than any alleged misdemeanor are the astonishing lengths to which law enforcement went in order to orchestrate a calculated, systematic campaign to blow past established constitutional limits.”

Police used fake bomb threat to install cameras in Robert Kraft sex spa case

If the PD gets away with this, the United States officially sucks and is no longer the United States.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

Sorry I disagree. The law is not about what you did or didn’t do but how it can be proven in a court of law. You can’t say Kraft did something illegal and then say that we can’t prove it due to “procedural” issues. It’s not till you can prove it was illegal. Innocent till proven guilty. Civil rights and protections exist for a reason.

Right. So OJ was innocent then as was Casey Anthony, Lizzie Borden and a host of other people found not guilty by trial. The world is black and white. You either legally are guilty or you didn't do anything illegal... good philosophy to live by. Personal opinions outside the legal scope do not exist and are irreverent to how someone should be be viewed.