What's new
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)

I feel really bad for these women.  They were very likely just trying to earn a living as a consenting adult and because of god knows how many laws/rules the police broke trying to catch something that did not exist they no longer have that chance to make their own choice. 

It was taken from them by people who think they assume some moral superiority over others and that disgusts me (very few things get me heated but this is one of them).  

There are so many things wrong in this world, why in gods name are we spending so much time and effort on something that should be kept between consenting adults?

And as this thread has shown numerous times, the Kraft case is just one of many where the police try to use "sex trafficking" as a scare tactic when it never existed in the first place.  All in the attempt to remove something that has been around since the dawn of time and should be made legal and regulated every where.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joe Bryant said:
In general.

Way more interested in that than the Patriot Fans / Kraft apologists. If you don't think the women prostitutes were feeling powerless and scared after being caught up in this, I'm not sure what to tell you. 
Click to expand...
I think the women don't want to testify as this gets their faces on national news.

 
Joe Bryant said:
In general.

Way more interested in that than the Patriot Fans / Kraft apologists. If you don't think the women prostitutes were feeling powerless and scared after being caught up in this, I'm not sure what to tell you. 
Click to expand...
The particular case, though, seems to be a microcosm of so many things wrong with these prostitution/"sex trafficking" stings. Elizabeth Nolan Brown knew right away it reeked up of trumped-up charges against the patrons and what they were supporting. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
In general.

Way more interested in that than the Patriot Fans / Kraft apologists. If you don't think the women prostitutes were feeling powerless and scared after being caught up in this, I'm not sure what to tell you. 
Click to expand...
Not sure anyone discussing the potential violations by the police are 'Kraft apologist'.  Also not sure who you think these women are scared of and who victimized them?  Kraft?  The massage parlor?  The police?   Of course the women are scared, but probably moreso from the police than anywhere else.   There has yet to be any evidence provided that this has anything to do with human trafficking.  The activity is illegal, but then again it appears to be between consenting adults until something suggests otherwise.  

 
I think the certainty that there wasn't any trafficking going on from internet observers is curious. I don't know that.

I certainly don't know that just because the prosecutor wasn't able to build a case. A case that would feature testimony from these women. Women who I'll say again likely feel powerless, scared, in a foreign country and have been engaging in illegal activity. A woman in that position testifying against one of the more powerful men in America would be a shock.

It's discouraging to see so many people dismiss any wrongdoing as "trumped up" charges or "scare tactics" when

1) they don't have detailed knowledge of the case and

2) the women involved have tons of reasons not to cooperate.

I know this is the stuff @Henry Ford's talked about. 

And again, I've no interest in debating the Patriot Fans / Trump Apologists on this. I agree with the poster above that the Kraft case seems like a microcosm of the issue at large. Just in a different way. 

 
jon_mx said:
Also not sure who you think these women are scared of and who victimized them?  Kraft?  The massage parlor?  The police?   Of course the women are scared, but probably moreso from the police than anywhere else.   
Click to expand...
You're not sure who I think these women are scare of. But "of course" they're scared? 

They're scared. Full stop. And I'm certain they're scared of the police. It's exactly why I'm saying I don't put much stock in the them not cooperating with the police to prosecute. 

We seem to understand they're scared of the police. But then when they don't cooperate with the police and testify then that somehow means the charges were trumped up. :confused:  

 
Joe Bryant said:
I think the certainty that there wasn't any trafficking going on from internet observers is curious. I don't know that.

I certainly don't know that just because the prosecutor wasn't able to build a case. A case that would feature testimony from these women. Women who I'll say again likely feel powerless, scared, in a foreign country and have been engaging in illegal activity. A woman in that position testifying against one of the more powerful men in America would be a shock.

It's discouraging to see so many people dismiss any wrongdoing as "trumped up" charges or "scare tactics" when

1) they don't have detailed knowledge of the case and

2) the women involved have tons of reasons not to cooperate.

I know this is the stuff @Henry Ford's talked about. 

And again, I've no interest in debating the Patriot Fans / Trump Apologists on this. I agree with the poster above that the Kraft case seems like a microcosm of the issue at large. Just in a different way. 
Click to expand...
The prosecutors have stated that 'no human trafficking' was found, which is much more than saying they has insufficient evidence.  No one with any knowledge of this case is still claiming there was human trafficking.  

 
Joe Bryant said:
You're not sure who I think these women are scare of. But "of course" they're scared? 

They're scared. Full stop. And I'm certain they're scared of the police. It's exactly why I'm saying I don't put much stock in the them not cooperating with the police to prosecute. 

We seem to understand they're scared of the police. But then when they don't cooperate with the police and testify then that somehow means the charges were trumped up. :confused:  
Click to expand...
Who is saying the charges are trumped up?  The human trafficking angle was made up by the police to enable them to get a sneak and peek warrant which would not have been available under a normal prostitution case.  

 
The human trafficking angle is really way more settled than people think. The DA said there was no evidence. I think people opposed to prostitution in general are going to find normative problems with this case regardless, people that are for legalized and regulated prostitution will see it another way.

I personally am on the fence on the legalization and regulation of prostitution because of Victorian concerns about privacy and morality, normative concerns for the law, and the sex trafficking angle. But I see a huge problem with fake bomb threats to install video cameras and the institution of surveillance of non-criminal and private activity through dubious means like the Patriot Act. 

Here's the New Republic citing Elizabeth Nolan Brown, who I've mentioned almost ad nauseum in this thread, right away, and rightly so. To keep insisting this may be a sex trafficking case in the ultimate Rohrschach problem, and nothing worth debating any longer. 

https://newrepublic.com/article/153905/american-case-robert-kraft-florida-prostitution-sting

 
jon_mx said:
Who is saying the charges are trumped up?  The human trafficking angle was made up by the police to enable them to get a sneak and peek warrant which would not have been available under a normal prostitution case.  
Click to expand...
I'm saying that the language the police and DA used when first reporting on the arrests was trumped-up. They threatened the patrons with more than solicitation, per the history of the case as reiterated in the New Republic article. 

 
jon_mx said:
Who is saying the charges are trumped up? 
Click to expand...
I think there is clearly some confusion in the wording.   What Kraft reportedly did was against the law and as such has been charged with misdemeanors. 

However, the only way he was caught was the Police using the "sex trafficking" angle to get the camera's illegally installed.

After 100's and 100's of hours of footage they found ZERO evidence of sex trafficking, which is why the whole case is likely to crumble now and Kraft may not even get the misdemeanor slap on the wrist.

So to summarize, the charges of soliciting prostitution were not trumped up, IMO.  However using the sex trafficking angle was almost certainly trumped up so that they could use it to catch the solicitors. 

 
And back to my earlier question: How does it happen that police put up surveillance that ultimately won't be allowed? 

Is it a case that their methods might work against a regular offender but when someone with Kraft's money / legal power is ensnared, it won't hold up?

Or are they just incompetent?

 
Joe Bryant said:
And back to my earlier question: How does it happen that police put up surveillance that ultimately won't be allowed? 

Is it a case that their methods might work against a regular offender but when someone with Kraft's money / legal power is ensnared, it won't hold up?

Or are they just incompetent?
Click to expand...
The method they use, a combination of surveillance okayed by a local judge and overcharging at the prosecutorial level, provides for a result that only the richest can afford or are willing to fight. That's quickly spelled out in the article I linked, and is accurate in my theoretical and practical experience as a law student and as a witness to criminal law proceedings. Woz is probably the most qualified to talk about privacy and plea deals in the criminal context here. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joe Bryant said:
And back to my earlier question: How does it happen that police put up surveillance that ultimately won't be allowed? 

Is it a case that their methods might work against a regular offender but when someone with Kraft's money / legal power is ensnared, it won't hold up?

Or are they just incompetent?
Click to expand...
Sneak and peek warrants are not typical at all.   Whether it is Kraft or whomever, this case is different as the police used questionable tactics.   We are witnessing the slippery slope that many warned about from the Patriot Act.  And I generally support the police, think the Patriot Act was mostly good, and do not like New England football.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
rockaction said:
The method they use, a combination of surveillance okayed by a local judge and overcharging at the prosecutorial level, provides for a result that only the richest can afford or are willing to fight. That's quickly spelled out in the article I linked, and is accurate in my theoretical and practical experience as a law student and as a witness to criminal law proceedings. Woz is probably the most qualified to talk about privacy and plea deals in the criminal context here. 
Click to expand...
Cool. So what I was thinking is right. The way the police set this up would likely have worked for lots of people. They're not stupid. 

But someone with Kraft's money / legal team was able to defeat it?

 
Joe Bryant said:
Cool. So what I was thinking is right. The way the police set this up would likely have worked for lots of people. They're not stupid. 

But someone with Kraft's money / legal team was able to defeat it?
Click to expand...
That's the common narrative, I'd say. Fighting a simple solicitation charge with high-powered attorneys is not something one sees every day. Usually people just cop a guilty plea and move on with their lives. This case was different. 

I don't think many people are claiming the police are "stupid." During the process of obtaining and signing the warrant, the prosecutorial parties and the judge might have overstepped their constitutional boundaries, but not many people are calling them ineffective or dumb, just overweening and officious. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
Cool. So what I was thinking is right. The way the police set this up would likely have worked for lots of people. They're not stupid. 

But someone with Kraft's money / legal team was able to defeat it?
Click to expand...
Again, lost in this discussion is the concept of due process and proper police procedure. IMO, it has nothing to do with privilege because Kraft is rich and hired the best legal team money could buy. The police suspected there was human trafficking going on in the spa. They got a warrant from a judge based on allegations that there was ongoing sex trafficking. The police faked a bomb threat to install hidden cameras . . . to record sex trafficking. Months later, they had lots of footage of solicitation but no evidence of trafficking. So they called an audible, decided to go after the high profile wealthy men, and charged them all with solicitation. However, if they had asked a judge for hidden cameras to pursue misdemeanor solicitation charges, the judge would most likely have declined the request as a waste of resources and an invasion of privacy (the last part is what the judge ruled most recently).

It's the same concept as law enforcement getting a warrant to search for a specific criminal act and uncovering evidence of other misdoings that were not declared in the search warrant. If law enforcement obtained a search warrant to set up cameras outside Bryant Boats because they believed there were stolen boats for sale (a felony crime) and instead recorded evidence of other misdemeanors, the police couldn't use the footage as it was not in the scope of the initial warrant. To further illustrate improper procedure by the police in Kraft's case, an officer (allegedly) fabricated a moving violation to force a traffic stop to gain access to Kraft's identity and personal information. If the case keeps going, this will be another item on the defense's hit list.

Other than Kraft himself (who claims he didn't do anything illegal), I doubt there are many people who think he paid for and received nothing more than a massage. But the police botched this case many times over (IMO) and that has nothing to do with Kraft having more money than several small countries. I suspect that some of the other men did not want to invest the time, money, and energy to fight the misdemeanor charges and agreed to a deal that would have their record expunged if they met certain terms. Kraft chose to fight it instead.

 
Usually when cities hit these massage parlors, they target all or at least all of the notorious ones which are pretty obvious that are not legit.  West Palm Beach targeted one parlor which happen to have a very famous customer.   I would imagine there are a dozen of these type places in a city as large as West Palm Beach.  If there was legitimate concerns about trafficking, why not target many of these places with these sneak and peek type warrants?     

 
Anarchy99 said:
Again, lost in this discussion is the concept of due process and proper police procedure. IMO, it has nothing to do with privilege because Kraft is rich and hired the best legal team money could buy. The police suspected there was human trafficking going on in the spa. They got a warrant from a judge based on allegations that there was ongoing sex trafficking. The police faked a bomb threat to install hidden cameras . . . to record sex trafficking. Months later, they had lots of footage of solicitation but no evidence of trafficking. So they called an audible, decided to go after the high profile wealthy men, and charged them all with solicitation. However, if they had asked a judge for hidden cameras to pursue misdemeanor solicitation charges, the judge would most likely have declined the request as a waste of resources and an invasion of privacy (the last part is what the judge ruled most recently).

It's the same concept as law enforcement getting a warrant to search for a specific criminal act and uncovering evidence of other misdoings that were not declared in the search warrant. If law enforcement obtained a search warrant to set up cameras outside Bryant Boats because they believed there were stolen boats for sale (a felony crime) and instead recorded evidence of other misdemeanors, the police couldn't use the footage as it was not in the scope of the initial warrant. To further illustrate improper procedure by the police in Kraft's case, an officer (allegedly) fabricated a moving violation to force a traffic stop to gain access to Kraft's identity and personal information. If the case keeps going, this will be another item on the defense's hit list.

Other than Kraft himself (who claims he didn't do anything illegal), I doubt there are many people who think he paid for and received nothing more than a massage. But the police botched this case many times over (IMO) and that has nothing to do with Kraft having more money than several small countries. I suspect that some of the other men did not want to invest the time, money, and energy to fight the misdemeanor charges and agreed to a deal that would have their record expunged if they met certain terms. Kraft chose to fight it instead.
Click to expand...
Interesting. You and @rockaction obviously see it very differently. So you think the police are just incompetent and anyone could have overturned their video evidence?

 
Joe Bryant said:
How much do you guys think it's "trumped up" charges vs powerless, scared women participating in an illegal activity are hesitant to cooperate and help make a case for the prosecution?

In these areas where it's a powerful man accused and a woman is the alleged victim, do you believe if the prosecutor isn't able to make a case then it must mean that nothing happened?
Click to expand...
Hard to speculate. I do know it’s an eminently avoidable problem. When you arrest dozens of johns and announce to the world that it’s part of a large trafficking case, you’re going to look stupid when you don’t bring a single trafficking charge.  You’ve placed even the prostitution convictions in jeopardy by making highly prejudicial public comments. Which is a prosecutorial no-no. 

By all means investigate aggressively. But save the back-patting. 

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
Hard to speculate. I do know it’s an eminently avoidable problem. When you arrest dozens of johns and announce to the world that it’s part of a large trafficking case, you’re going to look stupid when you don’t bring a single trafficking charge.  You’ve placed even the prostitution convictions in jeopardy by making highly prejudicial public comments. Which is a prosecutorial no-no. 

By all means investigate aggressively. But save the back-patting. 
Click to expand...
Thanks. I agree with you. What do you make of the talk that the police faked or over exaggerated the trafficking talk to somehow help them? I'm way more with you, I don't see any reason for them to over exaggerate any charges there. This isn't a public relations battle. If anything, it would seem to hurt their case to say there was trafficking if they didn't think there was any. But it seems like people think just over stating the trafficking is part of how it's done. Doesn't make sense to me. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
Thanks. I agree with you. What do you make of the talk that the police faked or over exaggerated the trafficking talk to somehow help them? I'm way more with you, I don't see any reason for them to over exaggerate any charges there. This isn't a public relations battle. If anything, it would seem to hurt their case to say there was trafficking if they didn't think there was any. But it seems like people think just over stating the trafficking is part of how it's done. Doesn't make sense to me. 
Click to expand...
The police have exaggerated issues since the dawn of time do get the courts to work in their favor.  It just didnt work in this particular case.  They trump up things like this, drug issues etc to give themselves the upper hand.  Its a loophole that some if not all police departments  lean on to make it easier to bring charges to certain individuals.

Case in point, its almost impossible to charge these parlors or the johns visiting them without some elaborate "sex trafficking" story that sells a magistrate in granting a warrant like what was issued.  Often times like in this case its disgusting.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Thanks. I agree with you. What do you make of the talk that the police faked or over exaggerated the trafficking talk to somehow help them? I'm way more with you, I don't see any reason for them to over exaggerate any charges there. This isn't a public relations battle. If anything, it would seem to hurt their case to say there was trafficking if they didn't think there was any. But it seems like people think just over stating the trafficking is part of how it's done. Doesn't make sense to me. 
Click to expand...
This is pretty simple to me.  The police would not be able to obtain the ability to place the cameras with out convincing the courts that they had significant cause to believe there was trafficking.

So we are left with two choices:

a) The police dramatically overstated the trafficking talk to the courts

b) The police were incompetent

I lean more towards a) myself but others might choose b).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
pantherclub said:
The police have exaggerated issues since the dawn of time do get the courts to work in their favor.  It just didnt work in this particular case.  They trump up things like this, drug issues etc to give themselves the upper hand.  Its a loophole that some if not all police departments  lean on to make it easier to bring charges to certain individuals.

Case in point, its almost impossible to charge these parlors or the johns visiting them without some elaborate "sex trafficking" story that sells a magistrate in granting a warrant like what was issued.  Often times like in this case its disgusting.
Click to expand...
So the magistrates issuing the warrants are stupid? Do they not know the charges are always fake and exaggerated?

 
Joe Bryant said:
And back to my earlier question: How does it happen that police put up surveillance that ultimately won't be allowed? 

Is it a case that their methods might work against a regular offender but when someone with Kraft's money / legal power is ensnared, it won't hold up?

Or are they just incompetent?
Click to expand...
Incompetent. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
So the magistrates issuing the warrants are stupid? Do they not know the charges are always fake and exaggerated?
Click to expand...
I think calling them stupid is harsh.  I bet it is more of a "better to be safe than sorry" .

I don't think any judge wants to be on record denying a request involving something as serious as sex trafficking and then having it come true.

 
NewlyRetired said:
I think calling them stupid is harsh.  I bet it is more of a "better to be safe than sorry" .

I don't think any judge wants to be on record denying a request involving something as serious as sex trafficking and then having it come true.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Listening to folks it seems it's just standard procedure. Cops know they don't have any case. But they lie to magistrate to get a warrant every time. And the magistrate never seems to realize every time the cops claim it's trafficking it's really just nothing. You'd think the magistrates would eventually wise up to the cops apparently making up stuff every time. Weird. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
I think the certainty that there wasn't any trafficking going on from internet observers is curious. I don't know that.

I certainly don't know that just because the prosecutor wasn't able to build a case. A case that would feature testimony from these women. Women who I'll say again likely feel powerless, scared, in a foreign country and have been engaging in illegal activity. A woman in that position testifying against one of the more powerful men in America would be a shock.

It's discouraging to see so many people dismiss any wrongdoing as "trumped up" charges or "scare tactics" when

1) they don't have detailed knowledge of the case and

2) the women involved have tons of reasons not to cooperate.

I know this is the stuff @Henry Ford's talked about. 

And again, I've no interest in debating the Patriot Fans / Trump Apologists on this. I agree with the poster above that the Kraft case seems like a microcosm of the issue at large. Just in a different way. 
Click to expand...
I agree, but I’m afraid that’s fallen on deaf ears in here. I’m not going to argue about it anymore. 

 
If you can't find evidence of human trafficking after you secretly installed video devices inside, it is probably because they are not trafficking.   San Francisco which tries to help these women found most of these women are 35 plus in age, migrated to the US on their own, and willfully work at these places, normally because they don't speak English well and can't get hired elsewhere.   Now the work is often illegal and there are violations in labor laws, but it does not fit into any legal definition of trafficking.  If they were actually trafficking women, it is usually ones of younger age and for more explicit prostitution than what goes on in these rub and tugs.  

 
Joe Bryant said:
Interesting. Listening to folks it seems it's just standard procedure. Cops know they don't have any case. But they lie to magistrate to get a warrant every time. And the magistrate never seems to realize every time the cops claim it's trafficking it's really just nothing. You'd think the magistrates would eventually wise up to the cops apparently making up stuff every time. Weird. 
Click to expand...
Seems strange to me that you don't think that law enforcement will do what they can to get each other's backs. It happens all of the time.  90% of the time--if they make a mistake--they are lucky enough to where the resources of the department are deeper than the resources of the people they might be screwing over--and they get away with it.  Look at what happens when there is an officer involved shooting--they effectively get to investigate themselves to establish if there was wrongdoing--which is ridiculous.  Don't get me wrong--I'm not anti-police--I think that the vast majority of police officers are fantastic people.  With that said--I do think that when police bend rules and take advantage of their power--the results can be absolutey disgusting and disturbing.  In this particular case--the police bent the rules and abused their power/laws repeatedly.  They leaked stuff to the media which ended up not being true and tried to justify their questionable actions through the court of public opinion.   That's not how law enforcement works.  If it takes a wealthy person to remind law enforcement that they also have to abide by  protocols and guidelines--then so be it.  That should be celebrated--and people shouldn't be penalized for being successful. 

It also seems strange to me that you seem surprised that wealth grants people certain opportunities that might not be avaiable without it.  Strong and competent legal council costs money--and having access to wealth allows one that luxury. The same can be said about the best healthcare.  The best doctors are generally going to be available to those of whom can afford their services.  Education is another area where access to wealth gives certain people some advantages that might not be available to everybody.  That's just reality.  If you want to say the legal system is rigged to favor the wealthy--I think thats obvious.  I think life in general is rigged to favor the wealthy and successful.  

Earlier in the thread--you said that the female prostitutes in this case felt powerless in this case.  Are you implying that adult females that voluntarily set up an enterprise where they exchange intimacy for compensation are somehow victims?  The way I'm digestig your posts seem to imply that---and I just want to get some clarity on where you stand there.  If you do indeed feel that way--do you think that women that voluntarily hook up with men on tinder for free on a frequent basis are also somehow "victims"?  There is a clear and distinct line between adults voluntarily engaging in basic prostition versus human trafficking and sexual slavery.   Make no mistake--there is no shortage of people that voluntarily engage in prostitution--and there is no reason why any of those people need to somehow be viewed as being "victims" or "victimized".  

 
rockaction said:
Henry, wait! We haven't heard someone be so wrong and condescending at the same time since ZenoRazon was in a thread. 
Click to expand...
I would have gone with AOC, but if you were looking for a poster OK.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Interesting. Listening to folks it seems it's just standard procedure. Cops know they don't have any case. But they lie to magistrate to get a warrant every time. And the magistrate never seems to realize every time the cops claim it's trafficking it's really just nothing. You'd think the magistrates would eventually wise up to the cops apparently making up stuff every time. Weird. 
Click to expand...
It is not weird, it is the conventional wisdom that all these massage parlors are some kind of huge trafficking ring.  The police and the courts believe this, but they can't prove it.  Why is that?  Why does investigation after investigation with months of effort and even illegal and invasive surveillence not provide evidence of human trafficking?  The claim that it is only because the women fear these 'powerful' men like Kraft is pretty lame, IMHO.  With the type of surveilence which was performed and the raids which were conducted, there should be ample evidence to back up these claims.  These women are recruited with ads in local papers and bulletin board ads.  The women are desparate for real work because of the reality of finding a job without documentation and the ability to speak the language well.  But that is much different than human trafficking.   In the vast majority of these parlor cases, it is not apparent that it involved trafficking, despite what the convential wisdom which is quite often reported in the newspapers.  Trafficking is a major problem, even in the US, but the evidence of the widespread trafficking ring in these parlors has not proven to be the case.  If there is some kind of connection to some kind of large chinese mob mastermind running a highly complex scheme, they are not finding it.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jon_mx said:
It is not weird, it is the conventional wisdom that all these massage parlors are some kind of huge trafficking ring.  The police and the courts believe this, but they can't prove it.  Why is that?  Why does investigation after investigation with months of effort and even illegal and invasive surveillence not provide evidence of human trafficking?  The claim that it is only because the women fear these 'powerful' men like Kraft is pretty lame, IMHO.  With the type of surveilence which was performed and the raids which were conducted, there should be ample evidence to back up these claims.  These women are recruited with ads in local papers and bulletin board ads.  The women are desparate for real work because of the reality of finding a job without documentation and the ability to speak the language well.  But that is much different than human trafficking.   In the vast majority of these parlor cases, it is not apparent that it involved trafficking, despite what the convential wisdom which is quite often reported in the newspapers.  Trafficking is a major problem, even in the US, but the evidence of the widespread trafficking ring in these parlors has not proven to be the case.  If there is some kind of connection to some kind of large chinese mob mastermind running a highly complex scheme, they are not finding it.  
Click to expand...
So the magistrates or people in charge that repeatedly issue warrants for made up things are just stupid. Got it. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jvdesigns2002 said:
It also seems strange to me that you seem surprised that wealth grants people certain opportunities that might not be avaiable without it.  Strong and competent legal council costs money--and having access to wealth allows one that luxury. The same can be said about the best healthcare.  The best doctors are generally going to be available to those of whom can afford their services.  Education is another area where access to wealth gives certain people some advantages that might not be available to everybody.  That's just reality.  If you want to say the legal system is rigged to favor the wealthy--I think thats obvious.  I think life in general is rigged to favor the wealthy and successful.  
Click to expand...
Sorry. I was being sarcastic. I absolutely think wealthy and powerful people have a huge advantage in legal situations. 

That's why I was asking if this particular case was an issue of the police were simply incompetent and anyone could get out of the deal or if it was a thing where the police were not idiots and it took someone with legal power and expertise to get out of it. 

 
jvdesigns2002 said:
Earlier in the thread--you said that the female prostitutes in this case felt powerless in this case.  Are you implying that adult females that voluntarily set up an enterprise where they exchange intimacy for compensation are somehow victims?  The way I'm digestig your posts seem to imply that---and I just want to get some clarity on where you stand there.  If you do indeed feel that way--do you think that women that voluntarily hook up with men on tinder for free on a frequent basis are also somehow "victims"?  There is a clear and distinct line between adults voluntarily engaging in basic prostition versus human trafficking and sexual slavery.   Make no mistake--there is no shortage of people that voluntarily engage in prostitution--and there is no reason why any of those people need to somehow be viewed as being "victims" or "victimized".  
Click to expand...
I think my point is it's more complicated than many want to see.

In reality, it's not always a bright line between what one might call consenting or consensual prostitution and what one might see as human trafficking or sex trafficking or slavery. I'm calling human and sex trafficking and slavery evil. 

What I find discouraging is what seems like flippant dismissal or minimization of anything related to this topic as not evil.

I see a lot of shoulder shrugging with "that's how it is" or "overreaching cops" or "witch hunt for my favorite NFL owner" or "isn't it like Tinder?" type stuff that feels like noise that gives cover, maybe unintentionally, to the evil of human or sex trafficking and slavery.

 
Joe Bryant said:
So the magistrates or people in charge that repeatedly issue warrants for made up things are just stupid. Got it. 
Click to expand...
What you are refusing to get is that this type of warrant (sneak and peak) are EXTEMELY rare, and this is possibly a first for this type of crime.  This is a massive invasion of privacy which was meant to stop acts of terrorism as a result of 9-11.

 A warrant should have been issued.  No one is saying this was stupid, but it is highly questionable and overreaching to use this type of tactic for what turns out to be only a bunch of misdemineors.  

I understand you view these as sex slavery and not voluntary.  However, the evidence found by the investigation revealed that these women were free to leave at anytime and work there voluntarily.  Maybe there is some higher mob-like organization which is somehow avoiding connection to all these spas which do in fact threaten these women and their families, but such a link has not been found.  

 
jon_mx said:
What you are refusing to get is that this type of warrant (sneak and peak) are EXTEMELY rare, and this is possibly a first for this type of crime.  This is a massive invasion of privacy which was meant to stop acts of terrorism as a result of 9-11.

 A warrant should have been issued.  No one is saying this was stupid, but it is highly questionable and overreaching to use this type of tactic for what turns out to be only a bunch of misdemineors.  

I understand you view these as sex slavery and not voluntary.  However, the evidence found by the investigation revealed that these women were free to leave at anytime and work there voluntarily.  Maybe there is some higher mob-like organization which is somehow avoiding connection to all these spas which do in fact threaten these women and their families, but such a link has not been found.  
Click to expand...
I think you're confusing "refusing to get" with disagreeing. Thanks. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
see a lot of shoulder shrugging with "that's how it is" or "overreaching cops" or "witch hunt for my favorite NFL owner" or "isn't it like Tinder?" type stuff that feels like noise that gives cover, maybe unintentionally, to the evil of human or sex trafficking and slavery
Click to expand...
When you hear that there is an asian rub and tug, is your first assumption that it is probably trafficking? 

 
parasaurolophus said:
When you hear that there is an asian rub and tug, is your first assumption that it is probably trafficking? 
Click to expand...
No. I'd say there's a chance it's trafficking. Quite a bit different from "probably".

And I'd also say if the prosecutors aren't able to put together enough testimony from the women (with lots of reasons not to testify) and evidence to make a case then I don't just wash my hands of it and think, "Glad there wasn't anything evil going on there". 

 
Joe Bryant said:
I think my point is it's more complicated than many want to see.

In reality, it's not always a bright line between what one might call consenting or consensual prostitution and what one might see as human trafficking or sex trafficking or slavery. I'm calling human and sex trafficking and slavery evil. 

What I find discouraging is what seems like flippant dismissal or minimization of anything related to this topic as not evil.

I see a lot of shoulder shrugging with "that's how it is" or "overreaching cops" or "witch hunt for my favorite NFL owner" or "isn't it like Tinder?" type stuff that feels like noise that gives cover, maybe unintentionally, to the evil of human or sex trafficking and slavery.
Click to expand...
This is a really strange position to take on this particular topic.

 
Joe Bryant said:
No. I'd say there's a chance it's trafficking. Quite a bit different from "probably".

And I'd also say if the prosecutors aren't able to put together enough testimony from the women (with lots of reasons not to testify) and evidence to make a case then I don't just wash my hands of it and think, "Glad there wasn't anything evil going on there". 
Click to expand...
In this case the prosecutor specifically said there were no signs of that.  Why would he say that then?

 
pantherclub said:
Because in this case (which we are talking about not in general) the DA said in the investigation nothing of the sort turned up.  Just because you think something squirrely is going on doesnt make it so.
Click to expand...
I'm talking in general. Substitute "favorite NFL owner" with "Guy I'm a homer for". What do you see as a strange position?

I think my point is it's more complicated than many want to see.

In reality, it's not always a bright line between what one might call consenting or consensual prostitution and what one might see as human trafficking or sex trafficking or slavery. I'm calling human and sex trafficking and slavery evil. 

What I find discouraging is what seems like flippant dismissal or minimization of anything related to this topic as not evil.

I see a lot of shoulder shrugging with "that's how it is" or "overreaching cops" or "witch hunt for my favorite NFL owner" or "isn't it like Tinder?" type stuff that feels like noise that gives cover, maybe unintentionally, to the evil of human or sex trafficking and slavery.
Click to expand...

 
^ fair enough but upthread you were talking about a rich dude getting off on the charges but I see it has morphed into the general category.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Flying Spaghetti Monster
  • Poll
Who is hottest prostitution arrest poll?
Replies
19
Views
1K
Mr. Pickles
Mr. Pickles
Sarnoff
Canadian Supreme Court overturns all laws against prostitution
Replies
38
Views
1K
BigSteelThrill
B
BobbyLayne
The 25 Greatest Films of the 21st Century So Far
2 3 4
Replies
155
Views
6K
El Floppo
El Floppo

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top