A slightly more modest pipe dream.
[QUOTE=GripNSip;4219351]They throw out the charges and then if he sues and wins and the Jupiter country then has to pay him costing them millions in tax payer dollars would be the ultimate pipe dream. I pray for this to happen because then all other cities and states will learn a valuable lesson and while it might not lead to changes in the law, will discourage them from investigating AMPs in the future.[/QUOTE]Whether or not Kraft collects damages, it's my hope that there's a substantive legal ruling that slaps down LE's tactics. For example, using the pretext of "trafficking" when the most that was going on was garden-variety prostitution, most of which would only be considered misdemeanor level violations. Ruling that LE was fundamentally wrong to leap to the conclusion that a refrigerator and sleeping area were true signs of trafficking. And, of course, the other tactics like the bogus traffic stops, the fake bomb threat to install the covert cameras, and the use of covert cameras without exhausting other investigative avenues. It would be nice if the court would find some kind of constitutional violation, but I'm not holding my breath on that because we're talking about Florida State courts here, not Federal ones.
But I guarantee you that LE all over the US will be watching this case to see how things turn out. If these tactics are allowed to stand, then other LE departments will absolutely copy them. Likewise, if all or some are struck down, then LE will be on notice against this kind of abuse.
Uncle LEO and sex trafficking
Here's an interesting post from Reason discussing how Uncle LEO is continuing to use the term "sex trafficking" when such trafficking apparently doesn't exist. This doesn't directly concern the hobby; it concerns actress Allison Mack's guilty plea Monday to racketeering charges stemming from her alleged activities with the NXIVM cult. In exchange, prosecutors dropped sex trafficking charges against her.
[URL]http://reason.com/blog/2019/04/09/allison-mack-racketeering-reason-roundup[/URL]
Pseudo-Trafficking and the surveillance state
[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/13/us/google-location-tracking-police.html[/URL]
If you read the above article, while also keeping the Jupiter AMP case in mind, it doesn't take much imagination to see how personal privacy is increasingly at risk. Technology continues to develop pervasive and intrusive tools to track and monitor individuals, but we've allowed it because we think our laws and courts will prevent those tools from being used improperly.
When prostitution was merely prostitution, usually a misdemeanor level offense, use of those tools weren't permitted. What's new is the tactic of classifying EVERYTHING as trafficking (or "possible" trafficking), which means all bets are off and the full toolkit of the surveillance state can be used against you. And the media wh*res are fully onboard.
Let's hope Kraft wins this one
[QUOTE=JmSuttr;4230627]Prosecutors are using the lame argument that, because there supposedly was "evidence" of possible trafficking, that gave them justification to conduct bogus traffic stops, install covert cameras, etc.
IMHO, what Kraft's lawyers need to do is shove that argument down their throats by showing that the "trafficking" narrative was entirely fabricated by LE and unsupported by any objective evidence.
As I understand it, real trafficking requires that victims either be underage (thereby unable to give legal consent) or else be forced or intimidated in some way. Nothing I've seen in the affidavit, or anything released by LE, is remotely close to that standard.
IIRC, the whole case in Jupiter started with a phone call from a neighboring LE agency that essentially said "Hey, we've got trafficking going on in our area and we think you do too. "which shows there was an assumption of trafficking, from the very beginning, and everything LE did was manipulated and crafted to support that assumption.
Fingers crossed that Kraft's lawyers make them choke on their own BS.[/QUOTE]I sure hope so. I hope Kraft not only wins this case, the cops are left with no choice but to dismiss all charges against other defendants. Then maybe our outdated laws concerning consenting adults behavior can finally be revised.
Evidently Uncle LEO forgot sage advice offered by the late Benny Hill some years back. I know I've shared this video somewhere in the forum previously, but it's worth sharing again.
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6jaKkE0RsI[/URL]
South Florida massage czar a mover and shaker
I'm enjoying the fact that a south Florida massage parlor owner has connections to both the Mar-a-lago spy and a Trump inaugural ball. And where does the money come from, and where does it go to? Maybe nothing to it, but it's an interesting connection. [URL]https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/missing-inaugural-ball-money-adds-layer-to-odd-trump-china-story-1490789955614[/URL].
Judge blocks release of Kraft surveillance video
A Florida judge has blocked the release of the surveillance video of Robert Kraft's alleged visit to the Florida MP. Hopefully this video never sees the light of day.
[URL]https://abcnews.go.com/US/florida-prosecutors-set-release-police-surveillance-video-patriots/story?id=62461763[/URL]
Spa customers sue Florida authorities
From the story:
"Nearly three dozen men and women have filed a federal class-action lawsuit accusing Florida authorities of unlawfully videotaping them as they received legal massages at a parlor where New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft and others allegedly paid for sex ".
[URL]https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/04/22/customers-videotaped-at-kraft-connected-spa-sue-authorities/[/URL]
So the tables have turned. Let's hope the plaintiffs prevail.
Here's how they'd make the case
[QUOTE=Wp212;4244084]Legality of the surveillance aside, I'm kind of interested in how the police would have made their case.
They already admitted they only recorded video, not audio. So the seemingly easy defense would be to say the money paid was for a legal massage. The sex was just a free act between consenting adults. If they had audio and recorded the negotiations, things might be different, but as it stands, it seems difficult for the police even if they prove the surveillance was legal.[/QUOTE]They'd show the video, and other evidence, to a jury of 12 average citizens and ask them to decide if the $ paid was only for massage and the sex act was given for free. Sounds good, in theory, but I wouldn't buy that explanation as a jury member and I doubt most people would. Even if you believe, as I do, that prostitution should be legalized, the evidence is clear and convincing that masseuses and clients were engaged in illicit activity.
What's not clear and, IMHO, is completely bogus, is whether there was any trafficking involved. And that's a critical point because that's the rationale LE used to convince the judge to authorize the warrant for the covert cameras. As I understand it, the arguments being made by Kraft's lawyers are hammering LE on exactly this point. If they inflated or mischaracterized things in their affidavit, it's possible the video, and anything else the warrant produced, could be thrown out. That's what I'm hoping for, as a reasonably positive outcome. Prostitution and AMP stings will never stop but what LE can't be allowed to do is to label everything as "trafficking" and thereby justify their use of the most egregious, excessive and intrusive investigative techniques.
