Kraft Orchids Case - Prosecuters Want a Tug Rule?

XLIX said:

IIRC, Ito didn't make Furhman unavailable for cross examination. Fuhrman took the stand after his lies were exposed and he took the 5th.

Click to expand...

The questions about planting evidence were not asked of Fuhrman in front of the jury. They were asked in a closed session and Fuhrman plead the 5th when OJ's defense team asked him directly if he had planted evidence. So here you had the lead investigator in a closed session, not in front of the jury, whom had already lied about using racial slurs, refusing to answer a pretty elementary question that would obviously be a very crucial development in a case like that.

Bottom line is OJ didn't get "lucky". The state botched the case horribly and that's being generous about it. Kraft won't be "lucky" if the state has botched his case too. That's the justice system. Something like "did you plant any evidence?" being asked to the lead investigator on a murder case should be a pretty easy question to answer. And yes, after Fuhrman refused to answer the questions, Ito barred him from being cross examined by either side before the jury re-entered the courtroom. Ito deemed his credibility completely shot at that point, even though the jury didn't know he took the 5th on the planting evidence questions. Ito was correct on that call.

These back & forth walls of text posts suck

XLIX said:

If the video evidence is ruled inadmissible (even though they got a warrant for it before placing it) then sorry not sorry, but that's the textbook definition getting off on a technicality.

Click to expand...

No, that would be the textbook definition of stupidity and wasting everyone's time over something that's perfectly legal in certain areas of the US.

PatsWickedPissah said:

These back & forth walls of text posts suck

Click to expand...

I'm sorry. In the future, I won't hold your hand down and force you to click on the thread.

Antdawg said:

I'm sorry. In the future, I won't hold your hand down and force you to click on the thread.

Click to expand...

Settle down there son & have some respect for your elders.

I agree this thread is approaching "Fonzie Jumping the Shark" proportions.

This all works better when everyone plays nice, avoids personal insults towards other posters and engages in reasonable discourse. There are some folks who can never quite make it there unfortunately.

Antdawg said:

No, that would be the textbook definition of stupidity and wasting everyone's time over something that's perfectly legal in certain areas of the US.

Click to expand...

You think that because something is legal in Nevada the laws of Florida shouldn’t apply in Florida?

Change the title of the thread since this is no longer about Bob Kraft. Kudos to everyone for bringing OJ Simpson into all of this. This place never disappoints.

Antdawg said:

No, that would be the textbook definition of stupidity and wasting everyone's time over something that's perfectly legal in certain areas of the US.

Click to expand...

But it’s not legal in Florida. Last I checked, the laws of the state of Nevada have no bearing in Florida. Florida Law enforcement doesn’t say “oh this is legal in Nevada so let’s not bother enforcing it here.”

venecol said:

Hahaha, how about 65% of the planet or about 3.5 billion people disagree with you. Lmao

USA joins Arab countries and China (and for some reason caribbean islands) in keeping it illegal. That's good company.

View attachment 22872

Click to expand...

It's legal in Nevada, so the USA falls in the grey area

dtbrks said:

threads like this make me love the "ignore" features. I miss so much BS. lol

Click to expand...

What's funny is most of those "MEGA" threads turn into this dumb random back and forth and then when someone posts a video or something actually worth reading about, people are like "pUt It iN tHE MeGA thREad"...

Nikolai said:

What's funny is most of those "MEGA" threads turn into this dumb random back and forth and then when someone posts a video or something actually worth reading about, people are like "pUt It iN tHE MeGA thREad"...

Click to expand...

I've found they pretty much go off the rails after 10-15 pages. Seeing how this topic is so bizzare and evasive into some pretty potent topics it happened around page 6

IcyPatriot said:

Most scrutinuzed * ever in New England ... or how about ...

"The money shot heard around the world"

Click to expand...

Fixed

AndyJohnson said:

You think that because something is legal in Nevada the laws of Florida shouldn’t apply in Florida?

Click to expand...

Is the question do I want my law enforcement officers spending their time dealing with much more serious matters than this public spectacle that harmed no one and that is actually perfectly legal in some parts of the U.S.? The answer would be yes.

Antdawg said:

Is the question do I want my law enforcement officers spending their time dealing with much more serious matters than this public spectacle that harmed no one and that is actually perfectly legal in some parts of the U.S.? The answer would be yes.

Click to expand...

Well that’s not the question.
But if it were I strenuously disagree that a law that isn’t a law elsewhere should be ignored. That’s not the job of law enforcement. Their job is to enforce the laws not choose whether they like them or not.
If we only enforced the laws that 100% of the people think are good laws we wouldn’t enforce any laws.
Surely you can understand the difference between why we enforce laws without prejudice and there being a law you disagree with.

Antdawg said:

Is the question do I want my law enforcement officers spending their time dealing with much more serious matters than this public spectacle that harmed no one and that is actually perfectly legal in some parts of the U.S.? The answer would be yes.

Click to expand...

I don't want to jump too deeply back into the sewer that this thread has become, but your post illustrates a major issue in this country. Pretty much all criminal law is just the government trying to enforce its preferred version of morality. And people tend to respond to it with fervor when the laws support their morality (or lack thereof), and with hostility when the laws offend their morality (or lack thereof).

None of the above is new to history or unique to the U.S.. What makes it matter is the insanity of the modern U.S. governmental approach, which is to crank out a law covering every single angle for every single issue. So we get "But Nevada!" or "But Europe!" and the like, when people agitate for their preferences. And that's largely a product of immoral people governing an increasingly immoral populace.

Deus Irae said:

I don't want to jump too deeply back into the sewer that this thread has become, but your post illustrates a major issue in this country. Pretty much all criminal law is just the government trying to enforce its preferred version of morality. And people tend to respond to it with fervor when the laws support their morality (or lack thereof), and with hostility when the laws offend their morality (or lack thereof).

Click to expand...

I already well understand all of this. But the extent and resources certain law enforcement entities devote to fleshing out victimless, non-threatening, non-violent crime needs to be tempered with reality. And law enforcement ignores people breaking laws every day using that very reasoning. They are not and are not expected to be robots. And there are not an infinite amount of law enforcement officers to chase down every little crime that occurs under the sun. It's not realistic.

It's been very blatantly obvious from the get go on this thing that law enforcement, in this instance, has been way overzealous considering the subject matter at hand.

VectorPrime said:

What exactly is Kraft’s endgame here considering the league doesn’t need a conviction to punish him anyway? Drawing this out might just make the league want to punish him harder for being such an embarrassment.

Click to expand...

AndyJohnson said:

Plausible deniability.

Click to expand...

Deus Irae said:

Kraft has, as expected, turned down the SA's offer. It's still possible that he'll agree to a different PTD offer. We'll have to see what such an offer entails, if it is forthcoming.

Click to expand...

My buddy at work asked me this morning, "So what are they gonna do to punish us this time?"

"I would put nothing past Goodell. Nothing."

"So...What does that mean? Draft picks?"

"A first rounder."

"What about Irsay?"

I slapped my wrist.

Antdawg said:

I already well understand all of this. But the extent and resources certain law enforcement entities devote to fleshing out victimless, non-threatening, non-violent crime needs to be tempered with reality. And law enforcement ignores people breaking laws every day using that very reasoning. They are not and are not expected to be robots. And there are not an infinite amount of law enforcement officers to chase down every little crime that occurs under the sun. It's not realistic.

It's been very blatantly obvious from the get go on this thing that law enforcement, in this instance, has been way overzealous considering the subject matter at hand.

Click to expand...

Sums up the whole immigration issue.

PatsDeb said:

I agree this thread is approaching "Fonzie Jumping the Shark" proportions.

Click to expand...

sorry, I couldn't resist

Antdawg said:

But the extent and resources certain law enforcement entities devote to fleshing out victimless, non-threatening, non-violent crime needs to be tempered with reality.

Click to expand...

Who's reality?