Our Legal System (and what money can buy)

[jj22]

I think this is a disgrace. So much for the underage girls getting trafficked.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/florida-prosecutors-offer-to-drop-charges-against-patriots-owner-robert-kraft-11553014972

It's bad enough Trump is getting away with the real pizzagate after how the media and Americans ignored him and his families deep ties to the owner. Especially interesting after how they reacted to the fake news Russian Hillary story. But Americans holding Republicans at different standards then Dems (ignoring real news about Trump, while attacking Hillary for fake news) have already been discussed.

This is a failure of our system. And we all should be outraged.

Well I guess those of us who aren't millionaires.

We'd be facing life.

[*bfine32*]

(03-19-2019, 03:53 PM)jj22 Wrote: I think this is a disgrace. So much for the underage girls getting trafficked.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/florida-prosecutors-offer-to-drop-charges-against-patriots-owner-robert-kraft-11553014972

It's bad enough Trump is getting away with the real pizzagate after how the media and Americans ignored him and his families deep ties to the owner. Especially interesting after how they reacted to the fake news Russian Hillary story. But Americans holding Republicans at different standards then Dems (ignoring real news about Trump, while attacking Hillary for fake news) have already been discussed.

This is a failure of our system. And we all should be outraged.

Well I guess those of us who aren't millionaires.

We'd be facing life.

Unfortunately, I can only read the first paragraph as I'm not a subscriber (I only subscribe to FOX news and all its affiliates), out it seems they have to admit guilt and there is some education involved. I'd also like to see a requirement to contribute to stop the trafficking.

As to the Pizzagate thing: I don't remember Trump getting behind this conspiracy; but you're most likely right. Any attempt to tie Trump to what happened in Miami, holds as much merit as trying to attach Clintons to Pizza gate. Rich folk get away with BS sometimes; except the Clintons, they're victims.  

[jj22]

Trump and his whole family is knee deep in that parlor (and the owner). That's why I brought that up.

[*bfine32*]

(03-19-2019, 04:13 PM)jj22 Wrote: Trump and his whole family is knee deep in that parlor 

Perhaps an unfortunate choice of words.

But if he is found to have any knowledge of human trafficking and didn't bring it forward; I hope he never again sees the light of day.

[*michaelsean*]

Yeah because only rich people get deals on misdemeanor charges.

[Benton]

Without being able to read the story, I'm assuming prosecutors were asking for an Alford plea?

Either way, it's a misdemeanor charge, which, honestly, usually doesn't result in a lot. For a guy Kraft's age, many judges would avoid jail time because legally the state is responsible for medical expenses while incarcerated (and without knowing Florida's laws, jail time might never had been an issue).

But, I do agree, the legal system as it is tends to favor those who can afford better representation.

[Belsnickel]

(03-19-2019, 04:08 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Unfortunately, I can only read the first paragraph as I'm not a subscriber (I only subscribe to FOX news and all its affiliates),

WSJ is under the Newscorp umbrella. Get with the program.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-19-2019, 04:18 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Yeah because only rich people get deals on misdemeanor charges.

(03-19-2019, 04:27 PM)Benton Wrote: Without being able to read the story, I'm assuming prosecutors were asking for an Alford plea?

Either way, it's a misdemeanor charge, which, honestly, usually doesn't result in a lot. For a guy Kraft's age, many judges would avoid jail time because legally the state is responsible for medical expenses while incarcerated (and without knowing Florida's laws, jail time might never had been an issue).

But, I do agree, the legal system as it is tends to favor those who can afford better representation.

Anyone without a criminal history is going to be offered diversion for their first misdemeanor(s).  There are plenty of examples of the wealthy getting better treatment in the criminal justice system.  This example is not one of them.

[jj22]

I didn't know sleeping with underage girls was a misdemeanor.

And here I thought society was taking this trafficking of underage girls for sex trade seriously.

Guess not. Traffick on. That explains why it's such a big thing in America.

Next time I hear the media crying about this I'll roll my eyes. Everyone is all talk.

Actions speak louder than words. And if all it takes is admitting you did as punishment then yea, that'll teach them.

[CKwi88]

(03-19-2019, 04:27 PM)Benton Wrote: Without being able to read the story, I'm assuming prosecutors were asking for an Alford plea?

Either way, it's a misdemeanor charge, which, honestly, usually doesn't result in a lot. For a guy Kraft's age, many judges would avoid jail time because legally the state is responsible for medical expenses while incarcerated (and without knowing Florida's laws, jail time might never had been an issue).

But, I do agree, the legal system as it is tends to favor those who can afford better representation.

I think it's different from an Alford Plea, assuming that it works the same way in Florida as it does here in CT.

An Alford Plea still results in a conviction. When I hear "deferred prosecution" I don't think of a guilty finding. This sounds like what MA calls an "admission to sufficient facts". He recognizes that he would probably be found guilty (same as an Alford Plea) but instead of getting a conviction he's placed on a sort of pre-trial probation with certain conditions. Once those conditions are met and x amount of time goes by, the case is dismissed.

The OP is just misplaced outrage at its best. Any person, rich or poor, white or orange, would have been offered the same, provided they have no record.

The worst for Kraft will be coming from Goodell's, who can be as arbitrary as he pleases.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-20-2019, 09:41 AM)jj22 Wrote: I didn't know sleeping with underage girls was a misdemeanor.

First of all, do we know that these girls were underage?  Secondly, did Kraft know they were underage?  If he did not could he have reasonably expected that they were of legal age?  If a guy meets a girl at a bar at which you must present ID to enter and ends up sleeping with her, did he commit a crime if she turns out to be underage?  These are important questions as criminal intent is a key component of committing a crime. 

Quote:And here I thought society was taking this trafficking of underage girls for sex trade seriously.

Guess not. Traffick on. That explains why it's such a big thing in America.

Wait, are you now accusing Kraft of engaging in trafficking?  I rather think they people who were trafficking these girls are facing considerably more than a misdemeanor charge.

Quote:Next time I hear the media crying about this I'll roll my eyes. Everyone is all talk.

Actions speak louder than words. And if all it takes is admitting you did as punishment then yea, that'll teach them.

It seems to me that your anger here is misplaced.  Maybe give the facts of this case another look and perhaps you'll feel better afterwards?

[Belsnickel]

(03-20-2019, 10:45 AM)CKwi88 Wrote: The OP is just misplaced outrage at its best. Any person, rich or poor, white or orange, would have been offered the same, provided they have no record.

Eh, I'd disagree. I see a lot of deferred rulings here because of my role with the university and when student's get caught doing something stupid in the city, we get the court records. The differences in who gets that deferred prosecution situation is largely socioeconomic.

[Benton]

(03-20-2019, 10:45 AM)CKwi88 Wrote: I think it's different from an Alford Plea, assuming that it works the same way in Florida as it does here in CT.

An Alford Plea still results in a conviction. When I hear "deferred prosecution" I don't think of a guilty finding. This sounds like what MA calls an "admission to sufficient facts". He recognizes that he would probably be found guilty (same as an Alford Plea) but instead of getting a conviction he's placed on a sort of pre-trial probation with certain conditions. Once those conditions are met and x amount of time goes by, the case is dismissed.

The OP is just misplaced outrage at its best. Any person, rich or poor, white or orange, would have been offered the same, provided they have no record.

The worst for Kraft will be coming from Goodell's, who can be as arbitrary as he pleases.

An Alford Plea is a guilty plea where the person charged is maintaining that they're innocent, but admit there is enough evidence to convict them of the accused crime. It's important for the defendant if he believes he is innocent and might win on an appeal later with new evidence or a new judge. Most often, though, it seems like it's being used for defendants to save face.

As far as the conviction, yes, as it's a guilty plea, but the sentence is up to whatever the prosecution and defense work out, provided the judge approves (and I've seen judges toss plea deals out for being too light).

With deferred prosecution, the prosecution agrees to defer the charges as long as something is done (rehab, restitution, etc). I guess to be fair, they could make Kraft give out hand jobs to defer. 

[jj22]

(03-20-2019, 10:57 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: First of all, do we know that these girls were underage?  Secondly, did Kraft know they were underage?  If he did not could he have reasonably expected that they were of legal age?  If a guy meets a girl at a bar at which you must present ID to enter and ends up sleeping with her, did he commit a crime if she turns out to be underage?  These are important questions as criminal intent is a key component of committing a crime. 



Wait, are you now accusing Kraft of engaging in trafficking?  I rather think they people who were trafficking these girls are facing considerably more than a misdemeanor charge.


It seems to me that your anger here is misplaced.  Maybe give the facts of this case another look and perhaps you'll feel better afterwards?

I think it's like illegal immigration. No one will push to punish the companies for hiring them (penalties etc). If they did then their wouldn't be jobs for them to work once they illegally get here, and that would lead to a significant cut to illegal immigration. But anytime that is brought up people make excuses to continue to allow companies (like Trumps) to hire them.

If you want to stop trafficking you can't just slap the hands of those who partake in the services of these girls. End the demand, end the issue.

Not knowing the girl was underage has never been a legit legal excuse for those accused.

Try sleeping with a 15 year old and claiming you didn't know she was underage, and let me know how that works for you (it won't. Unless you are a millionaire I guess)

[Au165]

(03-20-2019, 12:27 PM)jj22 Wrote: Try sleeping with a 15 year old and claiming you didn't know she was underage, and let me know how that works for you (it won't. Unless you are a millionaire I guess)

You keep saying this, where are you seeing anyone at the spa was underage?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-20-2019, 12:27 PM)jj22 Wrote: I think it's like illegal immigration. No one will push to punish the companies for hiring them (penalties etc). If they did then their wouldn't be jobs for them to work once they illegally get here, and that would lead to a significant cut to illegal immigration. But anytime that is brought up people make excuses to continue to allow companies (like Trumps) to hire them.

In this regard you are correct.  However it is not a direct comparison.  Both parties are equally complicit in this issue, albeit for differing reasons.

Quote:If you want to stop trafficking you can't just slap the hands of those who partake in the services of these girls. End the demand, end the issue.

To some extent this is true.  However, you're not going to convince many people that first time offenders should be treated harshly.  I do find it interesting that the more left leaning a person is the more they are likely to support diversion and restorative justice, until someone they don't like gets what they consider a lenient sentence.

Quote:Not knowing the girl was underage has never been a legit legal excuse for those accused.

100% demonstrably false.  As in the scenario I posited, meeting a woman at a bar that requires ID to enter, if a person would reasonably think the person was of age then they will not be subject to prosecution in the vast majority of cases.

Quote:Try sleeping with a 15 year old and claiming you didn't know she was underage, and let me know how that works for you (it won't. Unless you are a millionaire I guess)

Again, context is rather important here.  Did you meet this woman at a bar or other scenario associated with grown adult behavior?  Would you not agree that meeting a person at a bar that requires an ID to enter is rather different than meeting them at a McDonalds?  Also, again, where are you getting this information that these girls in the Kraft scenario were underage?  Is this factual information you have or just something inflammatory you're throwing out there in an attempt to strengthen your argument?

[fredtoast]

Kraft was originally charged with a low level misdemeanor (I assume) for soliciting prostitution.  It would not be uncommon for a person to get charges like this dismissed upon completing a class and 100 hours community service.

Charging Kraft with human trafficking would be like charging a guy smoking a joint with international drug smuggling.

Here is what happens.  Local law enforcement arrest the clients just to blow up their arrest numbers.  The best way to get federal grants for fighting human trafficking is to claim you made 100 arrests related to human trafficking.  But most of those arrests are just clients who have nothing to do with human trafficking.

[jj22]

So it's like how they arrest the prostitute and john, but never the pimps?

Or the petty drug dealers and not the drug traffickers.

Would arresting the pimp (and tougher penalties) be the best option? Because arresting and charging the prostitutes hasn't worked. Is that what some of you guys are saying?

I'm honestly just asking for discussion no trolling.

Isn't the purpose of the death penalty to deter people from committing certain crimes? These wrist slaps aren't going to get it done (and hasn't). If they are serous about this sex trafficking phenomenon they have to do more.

[*michaelsean*]

(03-20-2019, 04:26 PM)jj22 Wrote: So it's like how they arrest the prostitute and john, but never the pimps?

Or the petty drug dealers and not the drug traffickers.

Would arresting the pimp (and tougher penalties) be the best option? Because arresting and charging the prostitutes hasn't worked. Is that what some of you guys are saying?

I'm honestly just asking for discussion no trolling.

Isn't the purpose of the death penalty to deter people from committing certain crimes? These wrist slaps aren't going to get it done (and hasn't). If they are serous about this sex trafficking phenomenon they have to do more.

They would arrest the pimp and the trafficker if and when they can.  Drug trafficker or the boss in whatever territory are quite a few steps removed from the kid on the street.

Make it all legal and we won't have to worry about it, and get a nice tax base.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(03-20-2019, 04:26 PM)jj22 Wrote: Isn't the purpose of the death penalty to deter people from committing certain crimes? These wrist slaps aren't going to get it done (and hasn't). If they are serous about this sex trafficking phenomenon they have to do more.

Confused. Are you arguing to give Robert Kraft the death penalty now?