Kraft Orchids Case - Prosecuters Want a Tug Rule?

[venecol]

I would wager that the motion for a protective order of the evidence (release of video) will go down in flames at tomorrow's hearing.

Florida has some pretty liberal public records access laws and in reading the media's counter argument to Kraft's attorneys motion, it sounded to me like they had a pretty strong argument.

This doesn't mean the videos will be released tomorrow and there will probably be an appeal filed.

 

[supafly]

Out of all of the tags for this thread, “train wreck” may be most appropriate, with “legal question” coming in as a distant second place.

 

[supafly]

There is a hearing tomorrow on the media access to the videos.

I thought they asked (begged) for a postponement on this ruling? While I haven’t followed the case as closely as you have, the irreparable harm argument seems to be as compelling as the media’s argument, at least in my somewhat uninformed opinion.

It will be difficult to get a fair shake with any potential jurors after they see * Bob getting the double old fashioned underneath the sheets on tape.

 

[DarrylS]

If the videos were found to be illegal in in conflict with the surveillance request, are the products of them also illegal??...

If you gather evidence illegally, isn't that evidence illegal??

 

[Ring 6]

I would wager that the motion for a protective order of the evidence (release of video) will go down in flames at tomorrow's hearing.

Florida has some pretty liberal public records access laws and in reading the media's counter argument to Kraft's attorneys motion, it sounded to me like they had a pretty strong argument.

This doesn't mean the videos will be released tomorrow and there will probably be an appeal filed.

Doesn’t the Florida law also hold that while a case is pending nothing can be released?
Remember this is about a request by a 3rd party to obtain the information, not about LE enforcement publicly releasing the tape which would not happen regardless.

 

[venecol]

I thought they asked (begged) for a postponement on this ruling? While I haven’t followed the case as closely as you have, the irreparable harm argument seems to be as compelling as the media’s argument, at least in my somewhat uninformed opinion.

It will be difficult to get a fair shake with any potential jurors after they see * Bob getting the double old fashioned underneath the sheets on tape.

All of these arguments were made by the defense along with others. However, reading the media response which was very thorough, it appears the "people's right to know" supersedes many of these as established by FL Supreme Court. They argue defendants are not witnesses (which do have an exemption) but criminals being charged so they don't have a right to privacy under the law and they also make a good argument against the fair trial argument. Remember this is the Ted Bundy state, and there hasn't been a shortage of high profile cases in the State.

 

[venecol]

If the videos were found to be illegal in in conflict with the surveillance request, are the products of them also illegal??...

If you gather evidence illegally, isn't that evidence illegal??

There is a separate hearing on the legality of the evidence (videos) on April 26. Today's hearing is on a request to issue a protective order on release of videos.

Defense is also arguing that if videos are illegal they should not be released (makes sense to me) but media is saying that even if obtained illegally case law says public is entitled to see them (which sounds crazy).

Even if the protective order is denied, I don't think videos will be released because the JPD would have to agree and I don't believe they will since it is an ongoing investigation.

 

[venecol]

Doesn’t the Florida law also hold that while a case is pending nothing can be released?
Remember this is about a request by a 3rd party to obtain the information, not about LE enforcement publicly releasing the tape which would not happen regardless.

Correct, it is up to JPD to release material which they probably won't due to ongoing investigation.

 

[Ring 6]

Correct, it is up to JPD to release material which they probably won't due to ongoing investigation.

But again they do not release the material for public consumption. They act upon a request under sunshine laws.
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding surrounding this, as if LE is using public shaming and release of the video so just to keep the record straight this is all about the rights of a 3rd party to request information not about the PD making a decision to release for ulterior motive.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

If the videos were found to be illegal in in conflict with the surveillance request, are the products of them also illegal??...

If you gather evidence illegally, isn't that evidence illegal??

"Illegal" means a lot of different things.

Certainly, something gathered in violation of the 4th amendment can't be used in the criminal trial. (Though that exclusionary rule only came into being for the federal government in 1914 (Weeks) and didn't apply to the states until 1961 (Mapp)). But that doesn't necessarily mean it can't be used for other, non-trial things. I guess we'll see!

 

[1960Pats]

"Illegal" means a lot of different things.

Certainly, something gathered in violation of the 4th amendment can't be used in the criminal trial. (Though that exclusionary rule only came into being for the federal government in 1914 (Weeks) and didn't apply to the states until 1961 (Mapp). But that doesn't necessarily mean it can't be used for other, non-trial things. I guess we'll see!

All of the Kraft/Spa threads here, with hundreds of pages each, can be summed up by that last short sentence.

 

[Antdawg]

Just checking in after a recess from the thread.

I see not much has changed. I believe Kraft's team will get the charges thrown out. The release of the video may be a whole different matter. But, as I've stated before, if I'm Kraft (and I realize I'm not), I would feel extremely flattered that people are so interested in watching me getting my pole jerked at 77 years of age.

Kudos to Kraft and his legal team for standing up for our Constitutional rights.

 

[IcyPatriot]

 

[patfanken]

All of these arguments were made by the defense along with others. However, reading the media response which was very thorough, it appears the "people's right to know" supersedes many of these as established by FL Supreme Court. They argue defendants are not witnesses (which do have an exemption) but criminals being charged so they don't have a right to privacy under the law and they also make a good argument against the fair trial argument. Remember this is the Ted Bundy state, and there hasn't been a shortage of high profile cases in the State.

since WHEN has the "people's right to know" preclude a person from getting a fair trial in ANY state???

BTW- "the people's right to know" has to at least have SOME limitations. Who benefits besides TMZ, and Jet fans from these tapes being released? If these tapes can be released, what about releasing photos of rape victims or crime scene photos of the School shootings? Lets make life more difficult for potential victims because "I have a right to see it"

Once the case against Kraft is concluded, I can see a POSSIBLE case to release tapes, but to what end. IF it is deemed the tapes where done illegally, then how can the public see what the court has deemed inadmissible. Makes no sense.

 

[Antdawg]

All those self-righteous hot takes on day 1 and 2 of this. I'm sure they meant well.

 

[patfanken]

So basically they've said that we've RUINED the reputation of a man who has pretty much led an exemplary like over a misdemeanor because we wanted to get a couple of weeks of national coverage.

Well on the plus side they GOT that coverage. On the downside, their department is making Florida Man look brilliant.

 

[Antdawg]

So basically they've said that we've RUINED the reputation of a man who has pretty much led an exemplary like over a misdemeanor because we wanted to get a couple of weeks of national coverage.

Well on the plus side they GOT that coverage. On the downside, their department is making Florida Man look brilliant.

A few of us tried to tell people here when this all broke that it had nothing to do with human trafficking, but it did not stop some fans from libeling Mr. Kraft.

 

[IcyPatriot]

A few of us tried to tell people here when this all broke that it had nothing to do with human trafficking, but it did not stop some fans from libeling Mr. Kraft.

I was comfortable calling him an idiot - he was libeled too severely by some IMO.

 

[IcyPatriot]

 

[Antdawg]

I was comfortable calling him an idiot - he was libeled too severely by some IMO.

I believe I called him an idiot too, but looking back, even that may have been too harsh. At worst, he paid for a * from a middle-aged woman, willing participant and tipped her more than she's probably ever been tipped before. What a horrible man.