PATRIOTS NEWS Kraft Orchids Case - Prosecuters Want a Tug Rule?

[Ring 6]

Well he gave them a month to watch the sex acts so I question the wisdom in that considering the conditions you laid out. The idea that victims being allowed to be recorded by a judge being trafficked and living under those conditions doesn't even make you bat an eye does it? Anyway if you're too dug in to even consider that could have been wrong then I'm done here.

Wait, you are mixing up facts.
He gave them a maximum of 30 days because that’s what the statute says.
He also included language about protecting the rights of thise not engaging in prostitution and so forth.
I’m not sure why including a recording device ac part of an investigation suddenly rises to horrible behavior. The judge didn’t tell them to sell it on the internet. The sunshine laws protect it from being released with any images of victims.
Speaking of dug in, it seems like you want to create a scenario where everyone on the LE side is a dishonest, incompetent person trying to manipulate the situation for personal gain and then choose the pieces that support it and ignore the pieces that don’t.
Are we really going to judge the merits of the investigation base upon you making up that they sat and filmed for 30 days when you have no idea that is correct?

*the information is coming from the warrants we have seen which do not include the kraft one

 

[RobertWeathers]

Always tough to accept when our erstwhile heroes turn out to have feet of clay. Whether it was not adequately supporting Brady or this all to human debacle, Krafty Bob is just a man after all. But he is still the man who kept Otis Orthwein from carpetbagging our team and laid the foundation for all we've enjoyed since, nothing changes that.

No question I have my issues with Bob but I am thankful he is the owner of the NEP.

 

[Lavictoire]

No question I have my issues with Bob but I am thankful he is the owner of the NEP.

His brilliance was to keep out of the way when he recognized what he had in Bellichick. He even admitted he screwed up with Parcells.

 

[LJRomanoff]

Always tough to accept when our erstwhile heroes turn out to have feet of clay. Whether it was not adequately supporting Brady or this all to human debacle, Krafty Bob is just a man after all.

Selling out Brady and the team in order to satisfy the league and/or put the fake controversy of DeflateGate in the past bothers me far more than anything related to the recent news. I think Kraft is overall an excellent team owner but it's hard to imagine someone like Al Davis ever giving up the fight like Kraft did.

What he was doing in Florida doesn't bother me in the least. The idea that it's entirely legal to pay for one type of physical stimulation for pleasure (i.e., the massage) but a crime to receive some other kind of physical stimulation (wink wink nudge nudge) is ridiculous and arbitrary. I can't be bothered to be even the slightest bit upset or disappointed about any of it.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

See, I think by deferring to the judicial systems to determine guilt or innocence is THE way to stay out of the cross hairs of these groups.

If said groups start to speak up, all Goody needs to do is defer to law enforcement and our legal system to determine guilt of innocence.

If Goody wants to get out of the business of being a social justice warrior and the moral compass of the universe this is the policy to have.

Disagree because there are times (like this, like OJ, etc.) where it is clear as day that the crime actually happened, but the legal system (sometimes for good reasons, sometimes for bad reasons) is unable to convict.

When I'm running a business, I don't need to see proof beyond a reasonable doubt to want to no longer be associated with an employee.

What if someone allegedly committed a vicious murder, and the cops were able to obtain irrefutable evidence that the person did it, but that evidence was legitimately excluded from trial because the cops violated the 4th amendment in obtaining it and the state was unable to secure a conviction. Are you seriously going to say that the person's employer should decide not to fire the guy because the state couldn't convict? Are you going to be fine working next to the guy?

 

[RobertWeathers]

Disagree because there are times (like this, like OJ, etc.) where it is clear as day that the crime actually happened, but the legal system (sometimes for good reasons, sometimes for bad reasons) is unable to convict.

When I'm running a business, I don't need to see proof beyond a reasonable doubt to want to no longer be associated with an employee.

What if someone allegedly committed a vicious murder, and the cops were able to obtain irrefutable evidence that the person did it, but that evidence was legitimately excluded from trial because the cops violated the 4th amendment in obtaining it and the state was unable to secure a conviction. Are you seriously going to say that the person's employer should decide not to fire the guy because the state couldn't convict? Are you going to be fine working next to the guy?

Its up to the teams/employers to make decisions that are best for them. If they think a player/employee is bad for business they can do whatever they want.

I am specifically talking about how crappy Goody and the league are at determining wrongdoing and how it can remove itself from that responsibility.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Its up to the teams/employers to make decisions that are best for them. If they think a player/employee is bad for business they can do whatever they want.

I am specifically talking about how crappy Goody and the league are at determining wrongdoing and how it can remove itself from that responsibility.

I agree Goodell is a pile of crap.

However in the case of the NFL the employers (teams) have delegated the power to make those decisions to Goodell. (And so have the employees, for that matter.)

 

[RobertWeathers]

I agree Goodell is a pile of crap.

However in the case of the NFL the employers (teams) have delegated the power to make those decisions to Goodell. (And so have the employees, for that matter.)

Yes. My PoV was from Goody's perch.

 

[PatsWSB47]

Wait, you are mixing up facts.
He gave them a maximum of 30 days because that’s what the statute says.
He also included language about protecting the rights of thise not engaging in prostitution and so forth.
I’m not sure why including a recording device ac part of an investigation suddenly rises to horrible behavior. The judge didn’t tell them to sell it on the internet. The sunshine laws protect it from being released with any images of victims.
Speaking of dug in, it seems like you want to create a scenario where everyone on the LE side is a dishonest, incompetent person trying to manipulate the situation for personal gain and then choose the pieces that support it and ignore the pieces that don’t.
Are we really going to judge the merits of the investigation base upon you making up that they sat and filmed for 30 days when you have no idea that is correct?

*the information is coming from the warrants we have seen which do not include the kraft one

Look it. You're the one painting the picture of horrible conditions that these victims were suffering under and you're the one asking basically what other alternative did they have seeing how this looked like trafficking. Whether they were recording for one day, 30 days or any amount of days in between I think it was negligent of th PD to not rescue them the minute they got the report of what they were told was going on.

 

[Ring 6]

Look it. You're the one painting the picture of horrible conditions that these victims were suffering under and you're the one asking basically what other alternative did they have seeing how this looked like trafficking.

No. The Florida department of health painted the picture. You disagreed with how the complaint was handled, I asked how you would have wanted it handled. It seems like you are angry at yourself for having to apply critical thinking rather than randomly criticize.

Whether they were recording for one day, 30 days or any amount of days in between I think it was negligent of th PD to not rescue them the minute they got the report of what they were told was going on.

I would assume any reasonable person would expect an investigation before “rescuing” based upon a complaint.
We also don’t know that they didn’t remove anyone there against their will immediately upon observing it.
I will also add that you are calling it negligent without even knowing the facts. You are saying out one side of your mouth there was no trafficking but out the other side you are saying they were negligent for not removing the trafficked woman that you say don’t exist as soon as they recognized they......don’t exist.

 

[Koma]

If the case is thrown out do you think Kraft should still be punished?

If I was running the NFL, would I punish Kraft if he escapes his legal entanglement? No, but that's because I'm a Patriots fans.

Short of Kraft being able to prove it was a case of mistaken identity, that he wasn't in Florida at the time and it was really his extremely horny twin visiting that spa, I think the NFL will still punish him even if the case is thrown out of court. There's been too much publicity about the case for the NFL and too much of an expectation that there will be a punishment for Goodell to decide that there's no need to sanction Kraft.

 

[Koma]

You think MORE punishment than Irsay received is appropriate? How?

Short answer: It's the Patriots.

A key phrase in my post was "a little more." Irsay received a $500k fine and a 6 game suspension. I don't know if the league is allowed to increase the fine over that amount, so if they go with the same fine and a 7 game suspension, that's "a little more" than what Irsay got. A 10, 12 or full season suspension would be ridiculous. I'm not going to be upset if the league goes the other way and gives Kraft a 4 game suspension, either.

 

[PatsWSB47]

No. The Florida department of health painted the picture. You disagreed with how the complaint was handled, I asked how you would have wanted it handled. It seems like you are angry at yourself for having to apply critical thinking rather than randomly criticize.


I would assume any reasonable person would expect an investigation before “rescuing” based upon a complaint.
We also don’t know that they didn’t remove anyone there against their will immediately upon observing it.
I will also add that you are calling it negligent without even knowing the facts. You are saying out one side of your mouth there was no trafficking but out the other side you are saying they were negligent for not removing the trafficked woman that you say don’t exist as soon as they recognized they......don’t exist.

Oh my God you're ridiculous. You presented it in support of their findings and asked what else would we have the PD to do? I'm believe you asked that rhetorically, like the PD handled it right we'd have no choice but to accept that.....and a reasonable person? Are you serious? Those conditions you advanced if true mean those girls were in desperate situations. A reasonable person doesn't set up surveillance. You dont wait for an investigation to get the victims out of that situation just like you wouldn't wait for an investigation to be done when someone was looking for a restraining order. No a judge writes a temporary one be safe rather than sorry and after a time will continue it or drop it based on what they found.
. And I'm not speaking out of both sides of my mouth. The no trafficking comes from that after the investigation, they haven't been any arrests for it........The negligence come from the complaint you presented, that at the time it was made should have been acted on immediately. It wasn't. Instead take time to set up cameras, allow what was going to keep going and put those girls through more days of what they were told was a living hell by the Florida Fept of Health.

 

[PatsWSB47]

.edit....and we dont know if they removed anyone damn you like carrying their water. Wed know if they removed people agai st their will and there be kidnapping arrests.

 

[RobertWeathers]

If I was running the NFL, would I punish Kraft if he escapes his legal entanglement? No, but that's because I'm a Patriots fans.

Short of Kraft being able to prove it was a case of mistaken identity, that he wasn't in Florida at the time and it was really his extremely horny twin visiting that spa, I think the NFL will still punish him even if the case is thrown out of court. There's been too much publicity about the case for the NFL and too much of an expectation that there will be a punishment for Goodell to decide that there's no need to sanction Kraft.

The NFL has purposely set up this convenient, ad-hoc, corrupt and inconsistent system of justice so it has flexibility to manipulate the process and afford itself an outcome to it's benefit. The problem is they've kucked it up too many times and they will surely get this one wrong no matter what they decide.

If they just followed what the courts decided they wouldn't feel obligated to punish owners and players because of publicity or optics.

 

[Ring 6]

Oh my God you're ridiculous. You presented it in support of their findings and asked what else would we have the PD to do?

I did not present it in support of anything.
I presented it as the only fact that existed.
The doh made a referral to the PD. You are saying they mishandled it. Simple question what would you have wanted them to do with the complaint.

I'm believe you asked that rhetorically, like the PD handled it right we'd have no choice but to accept that.....and a reasonable person?

It wasnt rhetorical at all.
It was an truly honest discussion.
These were the facts. You disagree with what happened next, so what would you have wanted them to do?

Are you serious? Those conditions you advanced if true mean those girls were in desperate situations. A reasonable person doesn't set up surveillance.

Ok so you are in favor of breaking down the doors and pulling people out based upon a complaint from DOH and do not expect LE to investigate the complaint before storming in?
That seems contrary to your other comments.

You dont wait for an investigation to get the victims out of that situation just like you wouldn't wait for an investigation to be done when someone was looking for a restraining order. No a judge writes a temporary one be safe rather than sorry and after a time will continue it or drop it based on what they found.

Does that not sound like a severe violation of civil rights? If I make a complaint that something illegal is going on in your business the police can barge in without any investigation and take people away based on my complaint?

. And I'm not speaking out of both sides of my mouth. The no trafficking comes from that after the investigation, they haven't been any arrests for it........

Then how was investigating wrong?
You are saying filming for x number of days was wrong because girls were at risk and should have been removed.

The negligence come from the complaint you presented, that at the time it was made should have been acted on immediately. It wasn't.

Sure it was. You want to say they should have hurried because there was trafficking but they acting inappropriately because there wasn’t.

Instead take time to set up cameras, allow what was going to keep going and put those girls through more days of what they were told was a living hell by the Florida Fept of Health.

You are all twisted in knots.

Why is it bad to take the half hour needed to install cameras if there is no trafficking going on?
If there was trafficking going on then they had solid reason to investigate and tape.


In any event, it seems I have your answer.
Once the DOH made a complaint you believe the PD should have broken down the doors and arrested everyone they found then figure out what they did and how you prove it later.
Ok, but I disagree.

 

[LJRomanoff]

Short answer: It's the Patriots.

A key phrase in my post was "a little more." Irsay received a $500k fine and a 6 game suspension. I don't know if the league is allowed to increase the fine over that amount, so if they go with the same fine and a 7 game suspension, that's "a little more" than what Irsay got. A 10, 12 or full season suspension would be ridiculous. I'm not going to be upset if the league goes the other way and gives Kraft a 4 game suspension, either.

A woman who Irsay did drugs with died in a house he bought with Colts money, and he endangered peoples' lives by DUI. That got him six games. In what universe is anything that Kraft did comparable? On the Irsay scale, Kraft should be suspended for a quarter of a game at most.

 

[Ring 6]

.edit....and we dont know if they removed anyone damn you like carrying their water. Wed know if they removed people agai st their will and there be kidnapping arrests.

If the police removed young girls they felt were trafficked as soon as they arrived they would be charged with kidnapping? Say what?

 

[RobertWeathers]

A woman who Irsay did drugs with died in a house he bought with Colts money, and he endangered peoples' lives by DUI. That got him six games. In what universe is anything that Kraft did comparable? On the Irsay scale, Kraft should be suspended for a quarter of a game at most.

Why 4 games and not 6? Why 4 games and not 2? Why any games?

 

[LJRomanoff]

Why 4 games and not 6? Why 4 games and not 2? Why any games?

In my opinion the NFL shouldn't be in the business of having its own star chamber for punishing people unless it directly relates to things that happen on the field. So the answer always ought to be 0 games.