but there is a reason Kraft hired real lawyers and not you to defend him. As I predicted from the beginning his best defense was to have the illegal videos suppressed and that's exactly what happened today. The warrant was quashed and all "the fruit of the poisoned" tree was thrown out along with the governments case. Without the illegally obtained "sex tapes" I can't imagine the government having much of a case. As I said on the very first day, the other defendants were VERY lucky to have someone like Kraft as a co-defendant.

With FOSTA/SETSA, I imagine (though I have no personal knowledge) that every municipality with a hard on for Vice arrests is now proposing prostitution stings as anti-trafficking programs, rather than "nuisance reduction."  
.
Flying the "Trafficking Flag" gets them funding, local politician support (because what elected official is going to say no to anti-trafficking efforts?), and when the busts roll in, national media attention.  So a huge "atta boy" to all who got in on the right side of this LE effort.  
.
But as has been pointed out earlier, virtually NONE of the charges filed ever include actual trafficking violations. They all reduce to simple prostitution, whether the defendant fights, or pleads out.  
.
And the preliminary data about the adverse impact of FOSTA/SETSA on SW's is ringing true to the predictions. SW's are much less safe in the post legislation world.

You managed to write an entire post without mentioning Trump.  I didn't know you still had it in you.  Lol

If rich guys expand the boundaries of freedom and beat back government overreach, yay for rich guys.

So how do you explain the who bribe for college admissions story in the news these days. One would think based on your argument such charges would never even see the light of day.

First, Kraft hasn't gotten off yet, as prosecutors are appealing the trial judge's decision to suppress the video. Second, saying Kraft beat the govt (assuming he does) only because he's rich implies that the govt's case was a good one to begin with and didn't involve legal/constitutional violations. Third, implying that Kraft's money has somehow purchased favorable consideration from the judge and/or prosecutors assumes, as lawyers might say, "facts not in evidence."

EVERY day.  THAT would certainly explain a lot.  

whether prostitution is legal or not.  Cuddling is already legal.  Knock yourself out.  

I think you have just met one of those people who just can't stand the successes of others. It's so much easier to blame the system and claim victim status than it is to go out and make something of themselves.

For rich guys, even if you're seeing a $1000/hr girl, its cheaper in the long run than the typical affair where you set her up in an apartment and pay her living expenses.  Sometimes the price of exclusivity is just too high to justify, even for the rich.  At least Kraft knows how to get value for his money and kudos to him for accepting the same risks as the rest of us. Years ago, when I was starting out in the 80's, some of my co-workers in NYC would spend $150,000 a year on a mistress (that's close to HALF A MILLION in today's dollars), including her rent, living expenses, and allowance to spend as she pleased.  That's way too much to spend on just ONE girl, IMO.  

Assuming that Kraft prevails in court and doesn't get too badly beaten up by the NFL or MLS, he will be able to afford to combine business and pleasure by hopping a plane to friendlier foreign shores when the urge arises. He can scout the talent at each destination for their football skills, soccer skills, and other skills ... and take a business deduction for the football and soccer portion of his expenses.

but I kind of doubt he would have mentioned Epstein if it weren't for his connection to Trump.

any problem at all with rich guys TOFTT.  

But the end result is going to be HUGELY beneficial for the entire TER community. So I am with you GO RICH GUY!!! lol

ask the court for a trial date, so it appears that the videos were their whole case and now they have no chance of getting a conviction.  If I were Kraft, I would demand a speedy trial (constitutional right) and get a 90-day trial date, so the prosecutors have to formally dismiss the case.  Otherwise, he will be in a kind of limbo until the judge dismisses it sua sponte a year from now for lack of prosecution.  There is also a chance the prosecutors will find some other kind of evidence to try him on if they are given enough time. A swift counter-attack is the best option.  

so that the prosecution can appeal the finding that their video is tossed out.

Based on the news and commentaries I've read so far, I don't think the videos will be allowed back in. If they are, Kraft might have to consider MY suggestion and fight this thing by challenging the prostitution laws themselves ... all the way to SCOTUS, if necessary.

should bring a motion on his own to shorten the time for hearing.  Federal appeals typically take at least 6 months from the time of filing until the hearing to allow time for both sides to complete their written briefings after the appellant has designated the record on appeal, but that can be shortened on a successful motion by either side.  

Remember, this is a misdemeanor case, not even a felony, of a state law in Florida.

Krafts lawyers do NOT want it going anywhere, they want it quashed exactly where it is, and that is what they will get unless the video is admitted into evidence. Without the video and with the other "evidence" like the bogus traffic stop already thrown out, the prosecution will have no case to move forward with, and most likely Kraft's attorneys will move that the case be dismissed "with prejudice" and that will be the end of it.

I looked for it now and couldn't find it, but if I do I'll link it here (If that is not against the rules since it obviously names a person.)

This is the only one of about 12 articles on the subject in the last 2-3 days that talks about the complexities of the court system involving the case, for those of you who care about such things.

Ok, you were more right than me. Ok, fuck you, I was wrong, but only a little. lol

Right now, as I understand things, the appellate court has kind of a mishmash of procedural and (potentially) constitutional issues on its plate. If they uphold the trial judge and throw out the warrant and/or video on purely procedural grounds (e.g., lack of proper minimization, etc.), then other LE agencies might still see a path to use the same or similar tactics as long as they avoid the mistakes made by Jupiter PD. OTOH, if the appeals court makes a clear statement of constitutional violations, that would go a long way toward quashing such tactics in the future, and not just in Florida. Fingers crossed for the appeals court to be bold and have the cojones to do the right thing!

A city bus. lol

Aaron Hernandez worked for Kraft as a NE Patriot receiver.  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Hernandez
He also "allegedly" murdered some people in cold blood.  He was known to be prone to violence and angry outbursts.  His conviction for the murder of Odin Lloyd was under appeal when he committed suicide in jail. "His conviction for Lloyd's murder was initially vacated under the doctrine of abatement ab initio because Hernandez died during its appeal."
.
Abatement ab initio: a common law legal doctrine that states that the death of a defendant who is appealing a criminal conviction vacates the conviction.
.
Kraft is 77 yo. I wonder if they would seek to extend the application of abatement ab initio to MISDEMEANOR convictions and appeals. Just keep appealing and pushing back the "final" legal determination until Kraft no longer has a need to appeal anything at all.  Any conviction will always be under appeal and Kraft will never be guilty.  
.
Kraft appears to be a healthy guy for 77 yo so that might require planning on 20+ years of long, draw out appeals ... as long as abatement can apply to misdemeanors.

One other thing to keep in mind though. At the least it should confine this type of warrant to "human trafficking" only and since real human trafficking is almost non existent at these store front locations, I can't imagine any such warrants standing up to scrutiny.

that a higher court may refuse to hear it because it is beneath their dignity.  On the other hand, the case is very high profile, so for that reason they may decide to get involved.

Small claims court would encompass the value lost in an odometer rollback.  The maximum amount the small claims court will hear varies from state to state, but mostly falls between $5-10,000.  Unless it was some kind of vintage exotic car worth hundreds of thousands, the rollback awards I have read about usually fall between $500-2500.

Anti-prostitution laws would prevail at the SCOTUS.  I don't agree with the law, but that is just how it is.  Basically it is accepted as constitutional that the states and feds can regulate commerce.  You can fuck all the girls you want for free (if you can find them) but if you hand them money for sex it becomes commerce.  (This excludes mistress/sugar babes, because the money exchange involves "relationships" and the government would have a hopeless case trying to assert what constitutes a "proper" relationship.)

Avoiding politics, the Trump "grab em by the pussy" comment was not about assault.  It was a statement that celebrities get extra special treatment from the ladies.  The popularity among women of the 50 Shades of Gray phenomena (the guy was a rich guy in the story) shows the hunger a lot of women have for the fantasy of some high status male demonstrating his desire for her by selecting her out of the crowd and unambiguously signaling sexual intent (in the 50 Shades case, rather rough intent, which the female reading public got all wet about.)

I disagree with this part:

That's why I say there is always risk ... a celebrity gets a lot more positive responses from bold actions than a non-celeb, but not every response is positive.  

"grabbing them by the pussy" if its a woman you're already having sex with.  Its a two-way street.  (I can't tell you how many times I got grabbed by the dick this weekend.)  Its a tip from Trump that I would be hesitant to try on a girl I just met.  Same with Clinton tip for us males.  Who knew how much more enjoyable a good cigar soaked in pussy juice would taste?  But again, I would never try it on a girl I just met.  

You are not meeting the right kind of women.  Zero percent of the ones I have had sex with before would have a problem with it.  They only get a second date with me if they prove themselves to be playful, sexy, and horny.  These are not nerdy girls, or feminist activists like YOUR wet-dream, AOC, so you probably don't know what I'm talking about.   Someday you'll become a man and maybe understand a little better.  

the post Jensen called you out on.  

Guys who haven't been with a lot of women typically don't understand that a LOT of women can be every bit as sexually aggressive as any man. I remember one girl friend who would sneak up on me while I was cooking, pants me and start sucking my dick while I was juggling three hot pans on the stove. I can remember a dozen times where she'd grab my dick and claim "My dick" so I would feel obligated to grab her pussy and claim "My pussy" I assume there are people even here who would somehow think I did something wrong.

I enjoy a good cuddle as much as he does, but mine are AFTER the fuck, not instead of.  Lol

I like nerdy girls ... if they are DTF.

Today's Boston Globe has an update on everyone's favorite NFL team owner:

Now that would be raunch on the back.

And I am amazed at the number of guys that according to many providers I know both here and in person that book providers without having any intention of having sex with them, not just the "snugglers" but guys who actually pay women "just to talk" I just find that so fucking funny, because most married men I know would pay for a woman just to STFU. ROFLMFAO