Robert Kraft charged in prostitution ring bust ( Update: Kraft legal team accused of lying in court)

[row_33]

30 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

No, they'll probably show him more, just to see if his true love is with him.

 

no............................

 

you can't move the pointless showing count to 125 times like they did for Art Modell when the TV contracts were up for renewal

 

Edited April 1, 2019 by row_33

[Doc]

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

It didn't.  What it did was require him and the others to give the DA a phony "W" when it is clear that even the DA feels the weakness of his months long investigation. 

 

Well, thank you for allowing me to think what I like and not fall in lock-step with your Bills Pro Shop merchandize orthodoxy.   I was hardly the only poster who figured McCoy for kicking a guy on his back---or that he's a knucklehead.  You can't conceive of the possibility that this guy is, as is Kraft, a total POS.  You are in a small group of devotees who feel that McCoy has never done anything he has been accused by myriad individuals---instead he is just extremely unlucky, even by NFL bad boy player standards.  Persecuted even...

 

A "phony W"...because now Bobby didn't commit a crime?  Come on, which is it now?

 

No, you weren't the only poster who thought Shady was guilty...initially.  Hell even I thought that the video looked bad for him (check the archives).  Then the case unfolded and it was pretty clear what happened and that you were the only one left behind.  The thing is, there have been a lot of stories that initially looked bad for one side and then went completely the other way.  Just look at the Smollett farce.  But that's the sad state of our news media today.

 

As for whether he's a POS, no I don't think he is.  And it might surprise you to hear I don't think Bobby is either.  But they both have done things to put themselves in bad situations and that's ultimately their faults.  Again I'm not nearly as invested in seeing Bobby face legal consequences as you were with Shady (both times) because the video tape will be far more humiliation than any justice that can be meted-out.

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, Doc said:

 

A "phony W"...because now Bobby didn't commit a crime?  Come on, which is it now?

 

No, you weren't the only poster who thought Shady was guilty...initially.  Hell even I thought that the video looked bad for him (check the archives).  Then the case unfolded and it was pretty clear what happened and that you were the only one left behind.  The thing is, there have been a lot of stories that initially looked bad for one side and then went completely the other way.  Just look at the Smollett farce.  But that's the sad state of our news media today.

 

As for whether he's a POS, no I don't think he is.  And it might surprise you to hear I don't think Bobby is either.  But they both have done things to put themselves in bad situations and that's ultimately their faults.  Again I'm not nearly as invested in seeing Bobby face legal consequences as you were with Shady (both times) because the video tape will be far more humiliation than any justice that can be meted-out.

 

Oh come on doc.  You know what is being discussed.  The DA clearly feel his case can't go to court as a successful prosecution---so he wants them all to tell the world that despite this, he, the DA would have won the case in court!!  I mean, you even conceded that no one would take such a silly deal.

 

Admitting you would have lost a court trial is far different than admitting guilt.(confessing).  In fact, a defendant will accept a reduced charge because he concludes that  his likelihood of conviction by trial on the initial charge is higher than acquittal.

 

The DA in the McCoy case, said (in the quote that you cited) that he could not determine who was the aggressor or whether anyone was acting to aid another.  It didn't go "completely the other way".  The DA did the math, like they always do.  Like they did in the Kraft case and offered a no charge plea.

 

Smollett obviously committed a crime (several), yet he is not being charged with any.  So, obviously, based on the opinions you have put forth, would conclude he committed no crimes.

[Doc]

22 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Oh come on doc.  You know what is being discussed.  The DA clearly feel his case can't go to court as a successful prosecution---so he wants them all to tell the world that despite this, he, the DA would have won the case in court!!  I mean, you even conceded that no one would take such a silly deal.

 

Admitting you would have lost a court trial is far different than admitting guilt.(confessing).  In fact, a defendant will accept a reduced charge because he concludes that  his likelihood of conviction by trial on the initial charge is higher than acquittal.

 

The DA in the McCoy case, said (in the quote that you cited) that he could not determine who was the aggressor or whether anyone was acting to aid another.  It didn't go "completely the other way".  The DA did the math, like they always do.  Like they did in the Kraft case and offered a no charge plea.

 

Smollett obviously committed a crime (several), yet he is not being charged with any.  So, obviously, based on the opinions you have put forth, would conclude he committed no crimes.

 

Wait, how do you know what the DA "clearly feels"?  Did you ask him?  See how that works?

 

Again we all know that Bobby committed a crime.  Why is he wasting time and resources on this charade and why aren't you incensed about that?  And why isn't the DA doing him a solid like you seem to be claiming the Philly DA did for Shady...against his own PD no less?

 

As for Smollett, please.  I've said time and again that it's case-by-case.  And again, like Bobby and unlike Shady,  he was charged.  But that whole thing is as corrupt as they come.

Edited April 1, 2019 by Doc

[Mr. WEO]

Why is a defendant “wasting time” challenging the charges against him in a case that the DA now doesn’t feel so good bout?  In what country do defendants (even ones you and I think are guilty) fore go their right to have their day in court?  In what country does popular opinion replace the court of law?  

 

The DA is saying admit I can beat you in court even though I’m not going to charge you with a crime!  Why would I be outraged if anyone turned that down?  Even you said nobody should take that deal.  The charge is off the table.

 

The DA thinks Kraft committed a crime.  The Philly DA could not determine IF McCoy commuted a crime...and he said as much,  despite your ongoing efforts to absolutely mischaracterize what he said.  So no one has to ask that DA feels...he told everyone.

 

[Doc]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

Why is a defendant “wasting time” challenging the charges against him in a case that the DA now doesn’t feel so good bout?  In what country do defendants (even ones you and I think are guilty) fore go their right to have their day in court?  In what country does popular opinion replace the court of law?  

 

The DA is saying admit I can beat you in court even though I’m not going to charge you with a crime!  Why would I be outraged if anyone turned that down?  Even you said nobody should take that deal.  The charge is off the table.

 

The DA thinks Kraft committed a crime.  The Philly DA could not determine IF McCoy commuted a crime...and he said as much,  despite your ongoing efforts to absolutely mischaracterize what he said.  So no one has to ask that DA feels...he told everyone.

 

OK, you continue to say you know what the DA in Bobby's case is feeling, so I can then know what the DA in Shady's case was actually saying to us.  That takes care of that.

 

But you yourself said that it wasn't much of a plea deal because Bobby still has to admit he would be found guilty.  That tells me the DA thinks he has a good case, otherwise he would have left the guilt part out and just had him do the diversionary and related stuff.  If he comes back with a weaker plea deal, then I would agree with you.

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

OK, you continue to say you know what the DA in Bobby's case is feeling, so I can then know what the DA in Shady's case was actually saying to us.  That takes care of that.

 

But you yourself said that it wasn't much of a plea deal because Bobby still has to admit he would be found guilty.  That tells me the DA thinks he has a good case, otherwise he would have left the guilt part out and just had him do the diversionary and related stuff.  If he comes back with a weaker plea deal, then I would agree with you.

 

Mo doc.  You quoted the Philly DA, so you can’t tell us what he’s “actually saying” lol.

 

And claiming that the Florida DA is so confident in his case that he will drop all charges is just....bizarre.  There IS no weaker deal he can offer than a no plea deal, literally. In fact the demand they admit that they “would have been found guilty” is the very unusual part of the offer.  And it’s why none of them is taking it.  You’ve already acknowledged that it would be a fools deal.  Why are you now pretending otherwise?

 

The usual plea is accept the charge, take the pretrial diversion, fine and service.  

 

[Doc]

10 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

Mo doc.  You quoted the Philly DA, so you can’t tell us what he’s “actually saying” lol.

 

And claiming that the Florida DA is so confident in his case that he will drop all charges is just....bizarre.  There IS no weaker deal he can offer than a no plea deal, literally. In fact the demand they admit that they “would have been found guilty” is the very unusual part of the offer.  And it’s why none of them is taking it.  You’ve already acknowledged that it would be a fools deal.  Why are you now pretending otherwise?

 

The usual plea is accept the charge, take the pretrial diversion, fine and service.  

 

 

Again if you can tell me what the Florida DA is thinking, I can easily tell you what the Philly DA was thinking when he made that statement.  You can't have it both ways.  Again it was an obvious case of Shady defending a friend, seeing as how the eyewitnesses said the cop jumped the friend and had him in a headlock on the ground.  If you have evidence otherwise, you should have produced it years ago.

 

As for the Florida DA, he's got a very strong case and it's not going to magically disappear (unlike in and thanks to Smollett's joke of a case), so he's looking for that W, whether it's "phony" or not.  He knows (like everyone else) that the worst part of this whole thing for Bobby is the tape and that's punishment enough, and there was never going to be any jail time and any fine would be chump change for him.  He just doesn't want this charade lasting any long than it has, wasting everyone's time and money for what even for you see is an obvious case.  The plea deal would force him to admit guilt but doesn't keep the tape private, so he rejected it hoping the DA would come back with a lesser plea deal or deal with the tape staying private.  It hasn't happened (yet).  So it may go to trial where 12 people should be able to see what it plainly obvious to everyone.  Or maybe not.  But the tape will come out and that's all everyone really cares about (while the DA wants the W).

[Gugny]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

Again if you can tell me what the Florida DA is thinking, I can easily tell you what the Philly DA was thinking when he made that statement.  You can't have it both ways.  Again it was an obvious case of Shady defending a friend, seeing as how the eyewitnesses said the cop jumped the friend and had him in a headlock on the ground.  If you have evidence otherwise, you should have produced it years ago.

 

As for the Florida DA, he's got a very strong case and it's not going to magically disappear (unlike in and thanks to Smollett's joke of a case), so he's looking for that W, whether it's "phony" or not.  He knows (like everyone else) that the worst part of this whole thing for Bobby is the tape and that's punishment enough, and there was never going to be any jail time and any fine would be chump change for him.  He just doesn't want this charade lasting any long than it has, wasting everyone's time and money for what even for you see is an obvious case.  The plea deal would force him to admit guilt but doesn't keep the tape private, so he rejected it hoping the DA would come back with a lesser plea deal or deal with the tape staying private.  It hasn't happened (yet).  So it may go to trial where 12 people should be able to see what it plainly obvious to everyone.  Or maybe not.  But the tape will come out and that's all everyone really cares about (while the DA wants the W).

 

If it was a slam dunk, I don't think the DA would have made the ridiculous offer that Kraft wisely declined.  If it was a slam dunk, they'd have gone straight to trial without making any kind of plea offer - in my opinion, of course.

[Doc]

17 minutes ago, Gugny said:

If it was a slam dunk, I don't think the DA would have made the ridiculous offer that Kraft wisely declined.  If it was a slam dunk, they'd have gone straight to trial without making any kind of plea offer - in my opinion, of course.

 

There are rarely slam dunks.  But no one really wants to go to trial because it's a huge expenditure of time and money.  So you offer a deal and hope it's accepted.  Happens all the time.

[iinii]

Do I hear 71? The debate rages on...

[416BillsFan]

In Florida you can request a trial by combat. Kraft has chosen Gronk as his champion.

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

Again if you can tell me what the Florida DA is thinking, I can easily tell you what the Philly DA was thinking when he made that statement.  You can't have it both ways.  Again it was an obvious case of Shady defending a friend, seeing as how the eyewitnesses said the cop jumped the friend and had him in a headlock on the ground.  If you have evidence otherwise, you should have produced it years ago.

 

As for the Florida DA, he's got a very strong case and it's not going to magically disappear (unlike in and thanks to Smollett's joke of a case), so he's looking for that W, whether it's "phony" or not.  He knows (like everyone else) that the worst part of this whole thing for Bobby is the tape and that's punishment enough, and there was never going to be any jail time and any fine would be chump change for him.  He just doesn't want this charade lasting any long than it has, wasting everyone's time and money for what even for you see is an obvious case.  The plea deal would force him to admit guilt but doesn't keep the tape private, so he rejected it hoping the DA would come back with a lesser plea deal or deal with the tape staying private.  It hasn't happened (yet).  So it may go to trial where 12 people should be able to see what it plainly obvious to everyone.  Or maybe not.  But the tape will come out and that's all everyone really cares about (while the DA wants the W).

 

We don't need your interpretation of the Philly DA's very clear statement.  It obviously does not say what you ant it too.  He doesn't know who the aggressors were (cops vs champagne stealers) or if the stompers were or were not coming to the aid of a friend in duress--so, no charges.

 

The Florida DA, by stark contrast, has not spoken publicly about why he is offering these men a plea where they aren't even going to charge them with a crime!

 

Gugny gets it.  You are still pretending you don't understand why this DA is making this offer.  If he thinks Kraft committed a crime, make him plead to a crime (as is typical--especially for a "slam dunk" case, no?) and pay the standard penalty for that crime.  Why the unusual stipulation that he say not that he is guilty, but (very specifically) that he would have been found guilty at trial.  That's nuts!

 

The tape is Kraft's problem?  Sounds like the DA is the one who is worried about the tape.  By many accounts, there is serious doubt of its admissibility---this has to be why he is offering a no plea deal.  And it's obviously why none of these guys are taking it.  Any number of them would simply take the standard busted john plea.  But they now see that the tape may be tainted evidence----this is all over the internet....how is it that you don't know this?

 

The DA can't offer a deal where the tapes are not released.  Florida's sunshine laws would prohibit him from doing that.......UNLESS the tapes were improperly obtained.  This too is all over the news and internet.  Look it up and save yourself from all this foolishness.

 

What do you think happens to the DA's case if the tape is ruled inadmissible?   Another simple question doc.  And before you answer, help yourself by looking up the issues raised with the tape as soon as the story broke.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

In Robert Kraft prostitution case, possible eyewitness could go against Patriots owner

 

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/in-robert-kraft-prostitution-case-possible-eyewitness-could-go-against-patriots-owner-162458676.html

 

 

[Doc]

4 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

We don't need your interpretation of the Philly DA's very clear statement.  It obviously does not say what you ant it too.  He doesn't know who the aggressors were (cops vs champagne stealers) or if the stompers were or were not coming to the aid of a friend in duress--so, no charges.

 

The Florida DA, by stark contrast, has not spoken publicly about why he is offering these men a plea where they aren't even going to charge them with a crime!

 

Gugny gets it.  You are still pretending you don't understand why this DA is making this offer.  If he thinks Kraft committed a crime, make him plead to a crime (as is typical--especially for a "slam dunk" case, no?) and pay the standard penalty for that crime.  Why the unusual stipulation that he say not that he is guilty, but (very specifically) that he would have been found guilty at trial.  That's nuts!

 

The tape is Kraft's problem?  Sounds like the DA is the one who is worried about the tape.  By many accounts, there is serious doubt of its admissibility---this has to be why he is offering a no plea deal.  And it's obviously why none of these guys are taking it.  Any number of them would simply take the standard busted john plea.  But they now see that the tape may be tainted evidence----this is all over the internet....how is it that you don't know this?

 

The DA can't offer a deal where the tapes are not released.  Florida's sunshine laws would prohibit him from doing that.......UNLESS the tapes were improperly obtained.  This too is all over the news and internet.  Look it up and save yourself from all this foolishness.

 

What do you think happens to the DA's case if the tape is ruled inadmissible?   Another simple question doc.  And before you answer, help yourself by looking up the issues raised with the tape as soon as the story broke.

 

No, the Phily DA knows what happened.  You don't and that's obvious.  But Shady wasn't charged.  Call him innocent or not guilty, it doesn't matter.

 

As for Bobby, we'll get to see this charade play out and the tape will be released.  And as ShadyBillsFan posted, it looks like someone's gonna roll on Bobby. 

 

Oh and thanks again for proving what a hypocrite you are when it comes to defending criminals who you like versus non-criminals who you don't.

Edited April 2, 2019 by Doc

[Mr. WEO]

Without a video (and audio), it would have to be someone rolling on Kraft for the DA to succeed.

 

 

And can you point to where I’m “defending” Kraft.  Be specific.

[Punching Bag]

3 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

In Robert Kraft prostitution case, possible eyewitness could go against Patriots owner

 

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/in-robert-kraft-prostitution-case-possible-eyewitness-could-go-against-patriots-owner-162458676.html

 

 

Have any players been penalized for attending such a place? That could be basis for any punishment of Robert Krass.

[Augie]

3 minutes ago, Limeaid said:

 

Have any players been penalized for attending such a place? That could be basis for any punishment of Robert Krass.

 

A player would be punished by not letting him play games. I’d like to see Kreaft punished by MAKING HIM PLAY GAMES. 

 

I may be a little bitter.

 

?

[Doc]

4 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

Without a video (and audio), it would have to be someone rolling on Kraft for the DA to succeed.

 

The link ShadyBillsFan provided also says that the tape likely will be ruled admissible because there is precedent for it being used and LE followed proper procedure.  I think it's safe to say that no more plea deals are forthcoming for Bobby.

[Punching Bag]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

The link ShadyBillsFan provided also says that the tape likely will be ruled admissible because there is precedent for it being used and LE followed proper procedure.  I think it's safe to say that no more plea deals are forthcoming for Bobby.

 

I still have not figured why TMZ has not got a copy like they usually do.  Maybe Krass has percentage of ownership?