Patriots Local News:

SOURCE:Yahoo! Sports


SOURCE:Boston Sports Journal


SOURCE:ProFootballTalk.com


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:NBC Sports Boston


SOURCE:NBC Sports Boston


SOURCE:NBC Sports Boston


SOURCE:ProFootballTalk.com


SOURCE:Yahoo! Sports


SOURCE:Yahoo! Sports


SOURCE:Yahoo! Sports


SOURCE:WEEI


SOURCE:WEEI


SOURCE:USA TODAY


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:USA TODAY


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:USA TODAY


SOURCE:USA TODAY


SOURCE:Patriots.com


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:NESN


SOURCE:Yahoo! Sports

Patsfans.com

Upcoming Opponent:
Next Up: Lions
Thu
Aug 8th
Right Now At PatsFans.com:
Bad Decision
Boomer Esiason has normally been respectful of Brady, but made some poor decisions with his comments last week about the Patriots QB.

Current Patriots Twitter Feed:

Kraft Orchids Spa MegaTug Thread

Discussion in 'The PatsFans.com Pub' started by Joey007, Feb 22, 2019.

  1. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    35,637
    Likes Received:
    1,213
    Ratings:
    +4,868
    “Victimless”? OMG! I’m appalled at your lack of sensitivity to social issues and the infamous yet elusive, “oppressed” people:p:p
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Sad Sad x 1
  2. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    45,128
    Likes Received:
    4,714
    Ratings:
    +27,881
    The other consideration could be the precedent the ruling sets. Theoretically the ruling can be more important than a misdemeanor charge because it sets a precedent for future cases.
     
  3. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    45,128
    Likes Received:
    4,714
    Ratings:
    +27,881
    The legality of the stops was the probable cause created by the crime witnessed during the surveillance. The stop wasn’t illegal, The ID was thrown out because the probable cause it relied upon was solely the surveillance which was excluded. Fruit of the poisoned tree as the TV lawyers love to say.
     
  4. maust1013

    maust1013 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2018
    Messages:
    4,802
    Likes Received:
    1,809
    Ratings:
    +10,281
    The operative word being theoretically, the setting of a precedent is no doubt often the reason a case is pursued beyond what one might otherwise feel is reasonable considering the crime involved but it's hard to see that as being the case in this instance. Essentially the judges ruling was the evidence was inadmissible because the police lacked proper instruction and/or oversight to ensure they adhered to what the courts would consider to be understood as reasonable and customary privacy standards. There's nothing precedent setting or Earth shattering there, just bad work/poor judgement on the part of the senior LEO's and SA's overseeing the investigations. TBH I can't help but think the judge went for both the lowest hanging fruit and minimal boat rocking with the ruling. There's ample indication that the facts were egregiously misrepresented in the warrant request but if you're a judge or attorney why walk into that minefield when there's a clear path around it?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    45,128
    Likes Received:
    4,714
    Ratings:
    +27,881
    What the judge actually did was state that Florida or SCOTUS precedent are what he is supposed to follow but because of a lack of cases and similarity he used a federal court case.
    That alone is appeal worthy.
    Regardless of your feelings on the strength or weakness of the case it’s a real thing that the state would have an interest in appealing a decision that limits their ability to enforce the law.
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
  6. Ice_Ice_Brady

    Ice_Ice_Brady PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    9,472
    Likes Received:
    3,932
    Ratings:
    +19,905
    1000% agree and really hope the judge did not actually rule that this would have been fine if there were better surveillance review procedures followed. I took it as the judge not wanting to pour gasoline on the warrant granting judge. But I wished he had sacked up and called out the extremely obvious probable cause sham along with the video review process. I felt this was a weak ruling and didn’t slam the door hard enough on these tactics.

    But typically the appeals court, and/or SCOF or SCOTUS will have final say anyway. And even though the prosecution is appealing, I believe the defense may ask the appellate court to reconsider the warrant ruling to hedge their bets in case the appeals court disagreed about the surveillance review.
     
  7. venecol

    venecol PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2015
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    739
    Ratings:
    +4,035
    You obviously don't realize that there are now 5 judges from different venues that ALL ruled the same. Your pro law enforcement rant continues even despite statements from SA admitting they did it wrong.

    This ruling doesn't limit their ability to enforce prostitution at all. There are other ways to enforce prostitution without trampling on the Constitution but it seems that you are perfectly fine with the government snooping on its citizens.

    Your position in this entire thread has been truly un-American and pathetic. You somehow believe that by supporting law enforcement you are a good patriot when in reality you are supporting Stasi style methods of government intrusion.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    45,128
    Likes Received:
    4,714
    Ratings:
    +27,881
    I am stating what the judge ruled, directly from his ruling. It’s not pro or anti anything it’s fact.

    So I guess you don’t understand what precedent means.
    My point has nothing to do with prostitution. My point is that a reason to challenge this ruling could be to challenge the use of a federal case as precedent. It could be to challenge the limitation of video surveillance set as precedent in this case as it applies to other video surveillance cases.



    That is not even close to my position in this thread. You need to learn to stop being threatened by someone who pursues a counter argument to your overreaching myopic views.
    Please, kindly show me MY WORDS in this thread, anywhere, that are unpatriotic.
    Of course I support law enforcement because law enforcement is a necessary part of any civilized society. Your creation of the misrepresentations of my viewpoint are all totally wrong. I’m sorry that you can’t understand the law, but you not liking laws does not make me wrong when I state what they are.
    You seem to not want to respond to my question about how your interpretation would mean a police officer witnessing a rape or murder being committed then the perp jumps in a car means he can’t be pulled over until he commits a traffic violation. I wonder why.

    How about going forward you refrain from making up positions that you want to argue about and attributing them to me when they aren’t my position? That might be a good start toward you learning some things.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  9. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    35,637
    Likes Received:
    1,213
    Ratings:
    +4,868
    So far, everything Kraft’s lawyers have done is good for all citizens and the nation as a whole

    No one wants our police to have the ability to bend or break laws to accomplish their goal. Maybe one exception would be for investigations of terrorism
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. KontradictioN

    KontradictioN Florida Man PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Messages:
    48,711
    Likes Received:
    7,234
    Ratings:
    +46,995
    They’ve hammered the state. Now that the video is sealed, the case is effectively over. Everything the state is doing from here is merely posturing.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  11. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    35,637
    Likes Received:
    1,213
    Ratings:
    +4,868
    They’re going to give it time so people will forget. Then a year from now they’ll be a small article saying prosecutors have dropped the case

    It’s sad it got this much publicity and over 500 posts in this thread. In reality, it was barely newsworthy
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. AndyJohnson

    AndyJohnson PatsFans.com Veteran PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    45,128
    Likes Received:
    4,714
    Ratings:
    +27,881
    It was mews solely because it was Kraft.
    If he had flown out to the AFCCG earlier this would have not been news.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Ice_Ice_Brady

    Ice_Ice_Brady PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    9,472
    Likes Received:
    3,932
    Ratings:
    +19,905
    • Like Like x 1
  14. venecol

    venecol PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2015
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    739
    Ratings:
    +4,035
    The only thing I disagree with in the 2nd article is that because of Kraft things turned out the way they did. There is no doubt he brought a lot of attention to this but it was a judge from Martin County that first threw out the videos and the attorney in that case was the first one to file motions to suppress. Eventually all defense attorneys began cooperating.
     
  15. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    35,637
    Likes Received:
    1,213
    Ratings:
    +4,868
    I get a kick out of reading Twitter comment regarding this case.

    It’s absolutely amazing how many stupid people make comments about “The wealthy”, “white privilege” or both combined.

    Those comments have exactly nothing to do with this case at all. I guess people think prejudiced comments are ok if it’s about wealthy or Caucasian people. But prejudice is prejudice and it’s never ok
     
  16. PatsDeb

    PatsDeb PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2005
    Messages:
    8,568
    Likes Received:
    2,318
    Ratings:
    +8,275
    The state should just give up the appeal, because the cops messed things up so badly in this particular case. I don't think the case sets a bad precedent for them at all (which is a little disquieting - I don't think sneak and peak warrants should be used for anything other than actual terrorism - they are just too invasive - but that is not what the judge ruled) - they just have to monitor their police force next time. The judge's ruling was that if they executed the warrant correctly, they wouldn't have lost their video evidence. All they had to do was: not watch or film any women customers under any circumstances as there was never any evidence (and the warrant was not granted on this basis) that women customers were engaging in prostitution; as soon as it was clear that a male customer was getting legal services at a spa, stop watching, either never turn on, or turn off the video and delete immediately any videos of that customer; perhaps figure out a way to identify johns (such as getting photos of their license plates) other than made-up-reasons traffic stops (although if the videos of the johns were into evidence, theoretically the traffic stops of them would be too).

    Instead the cops: acted like peeping toms and watched and filmed women undressing and getting massages even though the warrant did not extend to women; watched and filmed men not engaging in criminal activity undressing and getting massages even though at some point they could see there was no need to do so; most incredibly, stupidly and unbelievably KEPT the videos of men and women who did not engage in illegal activity, and THEN were all set to release those videos to the public when media vultures demanded they do so. Seriously, what a bunch of MAROONS. Every citizen of America should be glad that the 4th Amendment worked in this case, and that white-privileged Bob Kraft had the funds to make it happen.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. venecol

    venecol PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2015
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    739
    Ratings:
    +4,035
    I believe that several of the judges (5 judges ruled the same: lack of minimization) indicated that the warrants lacked instructions for minimization thus calling into question the actual warrants.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  18. dreighver

    dreighver Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    895
    Likes Received:
    318
    Ratings:
    +1,731
    It's not prejudiced to acknowledge that Kraft had an inherent advantage in his legal battle due to the fact that he's extremely wealthy and could therefore hire a robust legal team. It's perfectly possible that someone who didn't have the funds to hire a strong legal team may not have achieved the same outcome.

    That inherent advantage doesn't make Kraft a bad person, though. Those two concepts (Kraft having wealth/an inherent societal advantage AND still being a good person) are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, Kraft's inherent financial advantage doesn't nullify the clear legal basis for his victory, either.
     
  19. Ice_Ice_Brady

    Ice_Ice_Brady PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    9,472
    Likes Received:
    3,932
    Ratings:
    +19,905
    It seems to me that he had the ammunition for what you’re talking about, but it only took a single bullet.

    Kraft’s legal team wasn’t pulling any punches with their legal communications asking for favorable discovery evidence (including any prior misconduct by virtually everyone on the force). They were clearly ready to burn the officers to the ground and go all-in, appeal, delay with paperwork, stall, ask for
    motions to dismiss, cite more technicalities and case precedents, and overwhelm the prosecutors office.

    But essentially all five county judges didn’t need that level of legal muscling to make a decision.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  20. Patsfanin Philly

    Patsfanin Philly Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    12,026
    Likes Received:
    2,027
    Ratings:
    +8,794
    These Keystone cops arrested the wrong guy because his name was Patel..... seriously they are looking at a lawsuit based on negligence....
    https://nypost.com/2019/03/06/man-s...n-prostitution-ring-that-netted-robert-kraft/
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page

Search For Links: - CLOSE
For searches with multiple players
add commas (Ex: "Brady, Gronkowski")