Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragnar
I understand and I agree with you. But what I don't understand is how it gets Kraft out of it? They're either allowed to tape or not. It's not possible to tape only illegal activity. That's not how it works. Tapes are not sentient beings, they're tapes. They tape everything. This has to be known to everyone.
|
From what I understand of how this was done, it was not a continuous taping of every room all the time, which would almost certainly have been disallowed.
Cameras were manually monitored, with multiple rooms involved. If the activity appeared to be benign, the operator was supposed to minimize the screen, if it appeared to be criminal, then they would record on that camera.
The taping in a previous case had been thrown out because the screens were not minimized when non-criminal activities were involved, so the officers were instructed differently in this one, but the judge who ruled on the recent case did not think that was enough.
I have mixed emotions on this case. I believe strongly in the right to privacy, and I also think that there is a strong argument that prostitution should not be illegal. The old line about prostitution being the only time it is illegal to sell something that it is legal to give away.
At the same time, from a less ivory tower viewpoint, there is no question that prostitution in the real world leads top a lot of abuse of women and also human trafficking, so I am torn on this point.
While I am no fan of Robert Kraft, and certainly no fan of preferential treatment of the wealthy, I am not sure that this is the case here. Kraft was one of 20+ persons charged who were challenging the taping. Kraft almost certainly had the highest paid legal team, he is also the only person who has been made a laughing stock nationally. There was going to be a challenge to the evidence even if there was not a fish as big as Kraft involved, we just know about it because of him.
In the end, I am interested in how this turns out as much for the discussion of the privacy/prosecution balance point as for the snarky amusement of a holier than thou NFL owner paying to be serviced.