RoyBatty is alive Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 3 minutes ago, LabattBlue said: The guy got a rub and tug. You really expect him to be punished by Goodell? You do know Goodell works for Kraft? If he doesn't get punished, it will be a travesty? Seriously? LOL I bet he will be "punished" by Goddell, he has to, be it ceremonial like denying him from his own facility for a week he should do something to demonstrate to the players that the owners are also subject to a COC. Do I think he should get punished for a rub and tug, under normal conditions absolutely not but the NFL set up this system as being the moral police, they have to live with the system they created? The entire thing is out of control, few other sports league involve themselves in this nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 28 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: However, there was essential unanimity (I'm excepting for you, 4merper4mer and the 2 guys who said Kraft, et al had "no standing" to challenge the admissibility of the tape) on the internet regarding how this would go for Kraft. You know, the reason I stopped responding to you was because you have no idea what you were talking about, which you continue to demonstrate with each post. The tape was not suppressed because he successfully challenged the warrant, it was suppressed because he had an expectation of privacy in the back room, exactly what I said. Since you want to get all your legal expertise from articles, I suggest you actually read the one in the OP. Here, I'll help you: Quote Hanser ruled that the Patriots owner should have had an "expectation of privacy" while visiting the spa, because it's an establishment where people remove all or most of their clothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 26 minutes ago, LabattBlue said: The guy got a rub and tug. You really expect him to be punished by Goodell? You do know Goodell works for Kraft? If he doesn't get punished, it will be a travesty? Seriously? LOL Yeah, this is what I'm afraid of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Koko78 said: You know, the reason I stopped responding to you was because you have no idea what you were talking about, which you continue to demonstrate with each post. The tape was not suppressed because he successfully challenged the warrant, it was suppressed because he had an expectation of privacy in the back room, exactly what I said. Since you want to get all your legal expertise from articles, I suggest you actually read the one in the OP. Here, I'll help you: Like everyone else in the tape. I said as much yesterday: "This is where the evidence gathering failed: the order was "not sufficiently precise so as to minimize recordings not related to the crimes under investigation". The court's ruling goes into greater detail as to how they failed at minimization." Edited May 14, 2019 by Mr. WEO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 44 minutes ago, Happy Gilmore said: Worst case should be that this is just a misdemeanor for Krafty Bob. If so, he'll just get a slap on the hand. I want to see what Goodell does for punishment. If no punishment from the NFL, that would be a travesty. If so, they better put a glove on that hand. God only knows where that hand has been. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSHMEAB Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 I'm just not morally outraged (at all) by Kraft's actions. Since there is NO evidence of any human trafficking, I don't know how you could fairly view it as anything other than an old man doing something a little shady. There were obvious mistakes made by the police, but the underlying facts alone elicit a big fat MEH from me. Service exchange between two consenting adults just isn't something I'm gonna get worked up about. If LEO were looking into human trafficking, I'm interested in their findings and view it as a worthwhile investigation. Busting a bunch of old men for.......just isn't a great allocation of resources IMO. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 16 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: Like everyone else in the tape. I said as much yesterday: "This is where the evidence gathering failed: the order was "not sufficiently precise so as to minimize recordings not related to the crimes under investigation". The court's ruling goes into greater detail as to how they failed at minimization." You want to keep making comments about my standing explanation (while still not grasping the concept), but you were wrong. Now are you man enough to admit it, or are you going to keep up this laughably snide attitude to cover your lack of understanding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 8 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said: I'm just not morally outraged (at all) by Kraft's actions. Since there is NO evidence of any human trafficking, I don't know how you could fairly view it as anything other than an old man doing something a little shady. There were obvious mistakes made by the police, but the underlying facts alone elicit a big fat MEH from me. Service exchange between two consenting adults just isn't something I'm gonna get worked up about. If LEO were looking into human trafficking, I'm interested in their findings and view it as a worthwhile investigation. Busting a bunch of old men for.......just isn't a great allocation of resources IMO. I think it's more accurate to say that while looking into allegations of sex trafficking, they found people getting happy endings, and chose to charge them. Looking into allegations of sex trafficking isn't a bad thing, but they seem to be going down a dubious path. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 33 minutes ago, Koko78 said: You want to keep making comments about my standing explanation (while still not grasping the concept), but you were wrong. Now are you man enough to admit it, or are you going to keep up this laughably snide attitude to cover your lack of understanding? Why didn't the prosecutor argue that the motion to suppress the video should be denied on the grounds that the defendant has no standing to challenge the video taping? Serious question... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 11 hours ago, 4merper4mer said: I'm not arguing that Kraft or any of the johns could have stopped this. I don't care either way if they go after the johns. They are a town police force and are not going to solve all of this. Maybe that individual place will close up and move to the next town though. That's no solution really but I can see how Jupiter might think it benefited. The turnip truck is parked at 23rd and 5th. Hurry up and hop back on. So, when someone doesn’t agree with you, that means they fell off the turnip truck? I simply quoted an article, which discredits your crusade here, you ***** crayon chewer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 50 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: Why didn't the prosecutor argue that the motion to suppress the video should be denied on the grounds that the defendant has no standing to challenge the video taping? Serious question... They may very well have, however my whole point was that Kraft can't challenge the installation of the cameras, or the warrant authorizing the installation. It was not his business, nor his building, nor was the warrant targeting him. That's what standing means. The real issue - the one he won on - was whether or not those cameras being there recording anyone who walked in violated his expectation of privacy. That's what the judge was talking about when he stated: Quote The Court finds that the search warrant does not contain required minimization guidelines, and the minimization techniques employed in this case did not satisfy constitutional requirements. Kraft's rights weren't being violated by the cameras being there. His rights were violated because he has a right to privacy in the back room when receiving treatment, and the cops were filming him getting 'treatment' - then charging him - instead of shutting off the cameras (or otherwise disregarding what occurred.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 55 minutes ago, Koko78 said: They may very well have, however my whole point was that Kraft can't challenge the installation of the cameras, or the warrant authorizing the installation. It was not his business, nor his building, nor was the warrant targeting him. That's what standing means. The real issue - the one he won on - was whether or not those cameras being there recording anyone who walked in violated his expectation of privacy. That's what the judge was talking about when he stated: Kraft's rights weren't being violated by the cameras being there. His rights were violated because he has a right to privacy in the back room when receiving treatment, and the cops were filming him getting 'treatment' - then charging him - instead of shutting off the cameras (or otherwise disregarding what occurred.) Ok. Thanks. Didn’t mean to sound like a ball breaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 1 hour ago, stevestojan said: So, when someone doesn’t agree with you, that means they fell off the turnip truck? I simply quoted an article, which discredits your crusade here, you ***** crayon chewer. There is a difference between enough evidence to convict, enough to go to trial, and "no evidence". The police saw enough to: begin an investigation continue it with warrants for months speak out about it, in detail including plights of individual women they clearly made mistakes and this case fell apart but it was not invented out of thin air. I am willing to go out on a limb and guess that not many women want to move to a country where they don't speak the language, live in a strip mall with a pile of other women and service fat 70 year olds all day. Maybe I belong on a turnip truck but Occum's a Shaver says nope. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 3 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: There is a difference between enough evidence to convict, enough to go to trial, and "no evidence". The police saw enough to: begin an investigation continue it with warrants for months speak out about it, in detail including plights of individual women they clearly made mistakes and this case fell apart but it was not invented out of thin air. I am willing to go out on a limb and guess that not many women want to move to a country where they don't speak the language, live in a strip mall with a pile of other women and service fat 70 year olds all day. Maybe I belong on a turnip truck but Occum's a Shaver says nope. Agree to disagree and move on to Bills talk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 10 minutes ago, stevestojan said: Agree to disagree and move on to Bills talk? Sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 3 hours ago, Mr. WEO said: That's because it wasn't the unanimous opinion of the internet that "attacks" (no irony there right doc?) on poor McCoy were all "baseless". In fact, there were many here on this very site who disagreed with your conclusion that McCoy is completely innocent of everything. However, there was essential unanimity (I'm excepting for you, 4merper4mer and the 2 guys who said Kraft, et al had "no standing" to challenge the admissibility of the tape) on the internet regarding how this would go for Kraft. Oh and it was "unanimous opinion of the internet" that Bobby was innocent of the charges leveled against him +/- that the video was definitely going to be thrown out? LOL! Yeah, OK. No, there was analysis presented for Bobby just like there was for Shady. Again I didn't hear you mention any of it for Shady. On the contrary, you're still clinging to what you want to believe and not the facts because you don't like him/think he's a POS. Deny it if you want, you'll be fooling no one. People don't spend pages upon pages talking about people or things that they care nothing about. And the bottom line is that Shady didn't need a technicality to get off because he didn't commit a crime, unlike Bobby (which even you admitted). Try as you might, as just can't get around that one. It has nothing to do with hero worship, just the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 32 minutes ago, stevestojan said: Agree to disagree and move on to Bills talk? There's not much to talk about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted May 15, 2019 Share Posted May 15, 2019 Just like Goodell erasing Spygate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted May 15, 2019 Share Posted May 15, 2019 22 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said: Just like Goodell erasing Spygate. If I got to pick which video to watch........I might learn something about football! Beats Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted May 15, 2019 Share Posted May 15, 2019 2 hours ago, Doc said: Oh and it was "unanimous opinion of the internet" that Bobby was innocent of the charges leveled against him +/- that the video was definitely going to be thrown out? LOL! Yeah, OK. No, there was analysis presented for Bobby just like there was for Shady. Again I didn't hear you mention any of it for Shady. On the contrary, you're still clinging to what you want to believe and not the facts because you don't like him/think he's a POS. Deny it if you want, you'll be fooling no one. People don't spend pages upon pages talking about people or things that they care nothing about. And the bottom line is that Shady didn't need a technicality to get off because he didn't commit a crime, unlike Bobby (which even you admitted). Try as you might, as just can't get around that one. It has nothing to do with hero worship, just the facts. No on innocent (I told you he was guilty). Pretty much yes on the shaky ground re: the video and the traffic stop. Why are you still struggling with this?? McCoy was filmed kicking a guy on the ground. You conceded this. I don't know how else to help you at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiotAct Posted May 15, 2019 Share Posted May 15, 2019 they should ban the Patriots from the league for two years. That should do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted May 15, 2019 Share Posted May 15, 2019 11 hours ago, Doc said: Oh and it was "unanimous opinion of the internet" that Bobby was innocent of the charges leveled against him +/- that the video was definitely going to be thrown out? LOL! Yeah, OK. No, there was analysis presented for Bobby just like there was for Shady. Again I didn't hear you mention any of it for Shady. On the contrary, you're still clinging to what you want to believe and not the facts because you don't like him/think he's a POS. Deny it if you want, you'll be fooling no one. People don't spend pages upon pages talking about people or things that they care nothing about. And the bottom line is that Shady didn't need a technicality to get off because he didn't commit a crime, unlike Bobby (which even you admitted). Try as you might, as just can't get around that one. It has nothing to do with hero worship, just the facts. No I'm pretty sure that it's unanimous that Kraft's guilty on the internet. Nearly unanimous that the video was in trouble and could get suppressed. Pretty simple doc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinii Posted May 15, 2019 Share Posted May 15, 2019 22 hours ago, Doc said: Oh, there's a video all right. And it will make its way to the public like they all do. Go get your shinebox. Why don’t you go get it for me? Then you can shine my shoes and Mr. WEO’s while we laugh at you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted May 15, 2019 Share Posted May 15, 2019 https://www.yahoo.com/sports/robert-kraft-is-close-to-victory-in-prostitution-case-and-the-nfl-is-in-a-bind-052927126.html Robert Kraft is close to victory in prostitution case, and the NFL faces hard choices Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleTheWagons99 Posted May 15, 2019 Share Posted May 15, 2019 What a shocker. Florida ***** something else up.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 15, 2019 Share Posted May 15, 2019 3 hours ago, iinii said: Why don’t you go get it for me? Then you can shine my shoes and Mr. WEO’s while we laugh at you. It's a day later. I'll take that to mean you didn't find it. But go ahead and laugh. Save the biggest one for your hero being busted on video getting a handie (both front and back). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerbelly Posted May 15, 2019 Share Posted May 15, 2019 On 5/13/2019 at 6:56 PM, prissythecat said: Video Evidenced Suppressed Besides the video, the bogus traffic stop used to identify Kraft was also thrown out Bye bye Kraft charges? Does this mean Weo wins over Doc by KO lol? The Judge has a new Mercedes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted May 15, 2019 Share Posted May 15, 2019 4 hours ago, CircleTheWagons99 said: What a shocker. Florida ***** something else up.... But they sure get winter right! (IMO of course...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinii Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 (edited) 9 hours ago, Doc said: It's a day later. I'll take that to mean you didn't find it. But go ahead and laugh. Save the biggest one for your hero being busted on video getting a handie (both front and back). Kraft has something you can shine. Edited May 16, 2019 by iinii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 12 hours ago, Beerbelly said: The Judge has a new Mercedes. and 5 free messages at the Spa of his choice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 5 hours ago, iinii said: Kraft has something you can shine. I know. That's what got him into this whole mess. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 20 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said: https://www.yahoo.com/sports/robert-kraft-is-close-to-victory-in-prostitution-case-and-the-nfl-is-in-a-bind-052927126.html Robert Kraft is close to victory in prostitution case, and the NFL faces hard choices "Kraft is close to victory!!" is how he signaled the ladies to reach for the hand towel... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 Kraft will probably receive a medal of honor for all of this 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 53 minutes ago, Canadian Bills Fan said: Kraft will probably receive a medal of honor for all of this A shot to get rid of an STD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 In other news, the NFL has justawarded the Patriots with a 2020 1st round compensation pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 5 minutes ago, Canadian Bills Fan said: In other news, the NFL has justawarded the Patriots with a 2020 1st round compensation pick is that so they can take it away as punishment for Krafts Handy work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 28 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: is that so they can take it away as punishment for Krafts Handy work? Close. To apologize to Kraft for the unfair treatment he has been subjected to /s 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted May 17, 2019 Share Posted May 17, 2019 http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/26769864/florida-prosecutors-appeal-kraft-video-decision Florida prosecutors are appealing a judge's decision to suppress the video evidence in Robert Kraft's solicitation of prostitution case, according to a notice filed in st Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted May 17, 2019 Share Posted May 17, 2019 shocked has this non-story had enough yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted May 18, 2019 Share Posted May 18, 2019 On 5/17/2019 at 8:48 PM, ricko1112 said: Weird how people tied to the Patriots keep getting caught in the wrong place at the wrong time and are never at fault. It must be a coincidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts