Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Robert Kraft (yes, THAT Robert Kraft) charged with soliciting prostitution (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter IvanKaramazov
- Start date
rockaction
Footballguy
I agree with your first statement, but if they were able to secure a warrant from a judge because of probable cause, then it wasn't unconstitutional. Was it something where we'd like to see the judge use better discretion? Sure. But we've entrusted them with deciding whether a the police have satisfied the probable cause requirement for a warrant like that.
(HULK)
(Smash)
Just to follow up on this, the Jupiter PD used a delayed notice warrant (aka Sneak and Peek), something that has a very high bar to get as the person/business the warrant is for isn't notified of it's existence until like a week after it is issued. The PD played up the human trafficking thing as justification for the execution of this warrant, which then enabled them to place the cameras inside the spa. Because they already had enough testimony of customers they had stopped previously to make a case of prostitution, this warrant would've never been deemed necessary unless the PD played up the trafficking angle.
These tools exist as the result of the Patriot Act's enhanced surveillance. Are any of us okay with our right to privacy being violated for a misdemeanor, when that legislation was clearly intended as way to enhance law enforcement's ability to fight terrorism? I'm not okay with it. Not remotely.
(HULK)
(Smash)
When they already had sufficient evidence of prostitution occurring at Orchids of Asia to justify a regular warrant, they did not need a Sneak and Peak warrant. But they got one.
Again, I've got issues with Patriot Act tools being used to publicly embarrass and shame old dudes getting consensual handies from willing sex workers.
(HULK)
(Smash)
Feel free to read this and think about if you're okay with living in a country where this is standard operating procedure.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/10/ten-years-later-look-three-scariest-provisions-usa-patriot-act
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/10/ten-years-later-look-three-scariest-provisions-usa-patriot-act
rockaction
Footballguy
I agree. I'm not sure we're really arguing here and haven't been since the beginning. I thought people should listen to Elizabeth Nolan Brown's analysis. She's studied stuff like this for about four or five years and works the sex beat for Reason, a publication that is very much concerned with sex workers and the legality of their profession. In other words, Reason sort of goes out of their way as a publication to approach claims by the DA with skepticism instead of buying into a media scare narrative.
culdeus
Footballguy
What is it about this stuff that drives people to just get so invested in baseless claims? We had pizzagaters here too. @Henry Ford is not unique in this way.
Would be an interesting case study.
Would be an interesting case study.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
Pizzagate wasn’t the police telling people what now appears to be unsupportable. If the things I quoted the sheriff and prosecutor saying are actually just false (and if no trafficking happened they are) I certainly apologize for believing them.culdeus said:
culdeus
Footballguy
Their story was full of holes from the beginning.
Can we get back to legalizing this stuff? That's how the trafficking stops
pantherclub
Footballguy
Dude you were all in with both feet from the jump for some odd reason. Your posts speak for themselves.
rockaction
Footballguy
I don't think it makes sense to beat up on a particular poster for believing what the DA and the authorities were saying. Maybe in the future people will be more skeptical of these claims, though whether this is good or bad in the long run remains to be seen. I do know that the DA and the authorities do everybody -- especially real victims of sex trafficking and slavery -- a massively cynical disservice when they make ordinary prostitution out to be part of a larger, more sinister scheme of coercion and compulsion.
Last edited by a moderator:
pantherclub
Footballguy
In most cases you are right but he hammered the point home time and time again that if you got a handy from one of these places you were supporting sex trafficking. Having that mindset is just bizarre and then admonishing people forward is a little nuts.
rockaction
Footballguy
I think it was a bit more nuanced than that, but he certainly was zealous about it. But I've had experiences with Henry before. He's going to hammer his point home if he believes it. Usually, he's very methodical and skeptical. This time he wasn't, and he was too willing to cede skepticism to others, probably not realizing the utter cynicism and zeal with which the authorities can operate when it comes to sex work and the like. It's funny, the authorities acted depraved in the name of stopping moral turpitude.
Henry was wrong. But he's not an internet jock and there's no pressing need to call him back in the thread (not that it's too big of a deal -- I'm just saying) because he'll mea culpa if he's wrong, and he just did in his above post.
Last edited by a moderator:
pantherclub
Footballguy
Henry Ford
Footballguy
The odd reason was the actual statements of the police and prosecutors. Those being false would make the entire endeavor false. Mea culpa.
culdeus
Footballguy
You keep repeating this, but others heard the same statements and found fault with them. Ask why you didn't. Search for questions, not answers.
rockaction
Footballguy
As a defense of the conservative way (Henry's way) of thinking about this, there's a fine line between having a healthy skepticism of the claims made and bequeathing generosity towards criminality and depravity. In other words, it might be better to err on the side of caution when the ultimate result could be allowing slavery to continue. We do this with our jury standard of reasonable doubt in criminal law because we abhor seeing innocents locked up or forced into compelled and depraved situations through no fault of their own. We approach claims very cautiously depending on the end result of being wrong.
I was skeptical of the claims about the "spa" because I'm radically skeptical of authority and follow this stuff a bit. When certain people speak up about the possible falsity of the charges leveled against the "spa," I listen, but I have the benefit of trusting certain skeptics that have seen it before, like Elizabeth Nolan Brown. It's analogous to the rape cases at Duke and UVA. KC Johnson, somebody who specializes in covering events like those, called the hoaxes for what they were. But he is not a browbeater who claims that all rape charges are false. He's a methodical, studied, cautious expert who was right twice. KC Johnson has spent a lifetime sussing out what really happened regarding stories like that and called the cases at Duke and UVA correctly, all the while being very cautious and admitting he could be wrong. But people who follow him began to question the authorities' and "victim's" lines also because they held him in such esteem. So it's by no great strokes that I personally earned my skepticism -- I had people (experts) to turn to who said "Hey, that doesn't sound right and sounds like a typical false charge."
In other words, I don't think Henry needs to look in the mirror and ask himself questions. There's an equilibrium here, and being wrong and letting slavery go on might be the greater evil than defamation of character. Whether the police and authorities acted in good faith is on their conscience, but Henry's can be clean, IMHO.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Funny that major constitutional cases evolve from clearly criminal behavior by grubby little ####s. Still, I would have it no other way. The law [protects all or it protects none. Kraft is exactly as he has been portrayed here. I like that because I do not like him. That aside I like solid police procedure and I like judges who actually do more than a cursory, rubber stamping review of warrant applications. I do believe that evidence gathered in good faith, even if that good faith turns out to have been ill-founded in hindsight, ought not to be inadmissible, necessarily. I do not like evidence gathered from ill-founded warrants not based upon good faith. I do not like it when I suspect that officers and prosecutors claim good faith when they may have been lazy, or worse, purposefully blind. I do not know what happened here, in this particular instance. I will wait and watch, and maybe learn.
Last edited by a moderator:
rockaction
Footballguy
This seems like you want to say that evidence that is the product of good faith errors should be admissible, not inadmissible. That's also the current standard, isn't it?
pantherclub
Footballguy
Not to keep rehashing, but it wasnt so much your leaning on their statements it was the holier than thou attitude you had and the condemning of people going to these places and your insistence that it contributed to sex trafficking.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
It is, though there is great tension over that. Bad police work is likely to kill the goose that laid that golden egg.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
I wrote it poorly. I am pleased that you ascertained my meaning in spite of the obstacle presented by my poor writing.
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford
Footballguy
If it helps, the percentage chance that a place like this is involved in sex trafficking hasn’t changed and I still think people who use them should be beaten about the head and neck with a halibut.
Henry Ford
Footballguy
And not to keep rehashing, but this is what began my entire discussion on the subject:
That hasn't changed. At all. And if that offends you, don't worry - it offends me, too.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Oh, and don't get me wrong, I support pretty much all fish floggings.
Last edited by a moderator:
pantherclub
Footballguy
Sheriff Bart
Footballguy
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Are you suggesting that I have a romantic abnormality, one so unbelievable it must be hidden at all costs? If you are, you are correct sir.
You may remember me from such films as "Don't put That There", and "How to Handle Post Pubescence Blindness".
Last edited by a moderator:
GregR
Footballguy
What a wonderful statement that should be used so much more in life by everyone.
johnnycakes
Footballguy
Tom Servo
Nittany Beavers
Fortunately, Florida has a strong open records law. Ready or not, get ready to see Kraft's stick.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
Pretty jacked up the cops can illegally video him and then it becomes public record to release for everyone to see.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
I'm starting to think that Robert Kraft was put on this earth to serve as a cautionary tale about the dangers of illegally videotaping others.
BroncoFreak_2K3
sucker for Orange
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
Zow
Footballguy
Capella
Footballguy
Moe.
Footballguy
I really don’t think it’s that simple on this one. The net effect would likely be more trafficked individuals in total but the percentage of sex workers who were trafficked would go down. Is that a win? I’m normally on the other side of this but on this particular issue I don’t think we can legalize it and assume that will be a cure-all.
Moe.
Footballguy
Cowboysfan8
Footballguy
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
A fish to the face might still be #1 on the hit parade of how to flog someone.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
Legalizing things are never a cure-all. But they are usually a step in the right direction.
Last edited by a moderator:
Moe.
Footballguy
That might be true, there are pros and cons to each approach. I don’t think the impact on sex trafficking is a pro for legalization, unfortunately.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
What you say may also be true, the exception to every rule.
But if you look at the Nevada plan that has been in effect for decades, very few complaints about Bunny Ranches.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
squidrope
Footballguy
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
I am glad you took it in the spirit posted. In this day one never knows when they go for humor if it will be received graciously.
Similar threads
