Robert Kraft - What will happen?

[Shelby07]

48 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

i certainly didn't mean to suggest that being nice should in any way be mitigation and apols if i did give that impression. 

Agreed. Although the news reports I’ve seen seem to indicate that he was not a part of any human trafficking ring. So far, what I’ve heard is that he was a John. I hope that is the case. If things prove to be different, well, all bets are off. I relayed a personal story that I thought might be interesting, not necessarily relevant. 

[Ken Gargett]

1 hour ago, Shelby07 said:

Agreed. Although the news reports I’ve seen seem to indicate that he was not a part of any human trafficking ring. So far, what I’ve heard is that he was a John. I hope that is the case. If things prove to be different, well, all bets are off. I relayed a personal story that I thought might be interesting, not necessarily relevant. 

i've also not seen anything suggesting he was directly into human trafficking and let's hope not.

i have no idea if he is innocent or guilty and hopefully the courts will get it right, but a few of the comments on this site and elsewhere got me thinking. 

assume for this (with no evidence either way) that he (we'll call him K for our purposes) was simply a john (and if not, then hopefully the courts will bring back the appropriate verdict asap). think about that for a moment. K is an extremely wealthy man. so i think we can assume that he has not lined up for a quickie in the back seat from some drug-addled hooker from under a bridge. if he is paying, he is paying top dollar. now - and i have no personal experience in relation to this so may be way off the mark and if anyone can provide further enlightenment, be my guest - that means he is in a place with a willing and consenting hooker who does this for a living. she would presumably be very keen to make a rich man as happy as possible. blind freddie could see that sort of experience and differentiate it from time with basically a slave.

so, the second scenario, he is with some poor terrified girl who is a victim of human trafficking. it is impossible to imagine that he would find her a similar 'partner'. there is no way that he would not be very aware of the difference. i do not believe that K or anyone else in that situation could possibly not be aware that this was not a truly awful event for the girl. and utterly wrong. 

if he is with a willing and consenting high priced hooker, who is doing it for a living, sure illegal, but how serious is it and how much should the NFL get involved? does it deserve more than a proverbial slap on the wrist? 

if he is with some poor girl who is a victim of trafficking then i would jail him. and in that case, any claim that K didn't realise she was such a victim would hold absolutely no truth for me. 

[BrightonCorgi]

I don't expect much if any penalty from the NFL; perhaps a token fine for the sake of a fine?  Most of the owners in the NFL must all be wondering if they are tape at some other parlor now... 

[BrightonCorgi]

5 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

if he is with some poor girl who is a victim of trafficking then i would jail him. and in that case, any claim that K didn't realise she was such a victim would hold absolutely no truth for me. 

It's not up to patrons of any business to check visa status on people who serve them.

[srbbones]

Take away his Super Bowl rings so he can take care of himself, lol.    Seriously, this is going to be a tough one for the NFL (like so many).   They can't appear to be too tough, as though they are punishing the franchise, but they cannot appear lenient because of the Pats "nebulous" history.  Probably $500K fine?

[BarryVT]

Throw the book at him! Can't stand the patriots! And why would he stoop so low, has anyone googled pics of his last 34 yr old girlfriend? Wow When you can get that no reason to stray.

[Stogiepuffer]

Did anyone see who the other victim of this embrolio was? Just not right...


Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[dominattorney]

21 hours ago, MD Puffer said:

He's very wealthy and can afford the best attorneys.  I'm sure this story will have a happy ending.

Perhaps, but this strikes me as not so simple given the flood of strange issues it raises.  The NFL has an uncomfortable relationship with feminism.  Pink shoes and ribbons don't go very far when one of your flagship owners is boffing a sex trafficking victim.  Kraft is also emblematic of the white patriarch.  I'm reserving judgment on this one until more facts are brought to light. 

[mpq]

He will pay a small fine. He’s charged with a misdemeanor. It’s not like he beat a woman on video or shot someone. The other owners are not going to allow a precedent where if one of them gets charged with a minor offense they get a major penalty from the league. 

[Ken Gargett]

7 hours ago, BrightonCorgi said:

It's not up to patrons of any business to check visa status on people who serve them.

i'm not talking about visa status, which i thought would be reasonably obvious. and it is hardly relevant is one is committing an illegality. merely that if indeed he was involved, i would imagine, although someone might be able to advise otherwise, that it would be fairly easy to tell the difference between a hooker who is willing and consenting and keen to do her best and some young girl who is there against her will. 

[Philc2001]

For the record I despise the Pats. But I will put that aside.

IMPO this is not really in the NFL's jurisdiction, is it? I don't see how the NFL can act as judge, jury and executioner. The NFL really tends to overstep their bounds when it comes to personal matters off the field.

They should leave the matter to the courts, and once the courts decide, and the facts are clear, and assuming Kraft is found guilty and the severity of the crime is known, then the NFL can determine if the conviction violates any contractual agreements. If it does, then they can determine the corresponding action to take.

Frankly, if he is found to be guilty, I think there is only one decision the league should deliberate upon; whether to expel him as an owner or not. If he violated his agreement, then they may be in their right to force him to sell the team. But I suspect they will never make that decision.  

[Ken Gargett]

1 hour ago, Philc2001 said:

For the record I despise the Pats. But I will put that aside.

IMPO this is not really in the NFL's jurisdiction, is it? I don't see how the NFL can act as judge, jury and executioner. The NFL really tends to overstep their bounds when it comes to personal matters off the field.

They should leave the matter to the courts, and once the courts decide, and the facts are clear, and assuming Kraft is found guilty and the severity of the crime is known, then the NFL can determine if the conviction violates any contractual agreements. If it does, then they can determine the corresponding action to take.

Frankly, if he is found to be guilty, I think there is only one decision the league should deliberate upon; whether to expel him as an owner or not. If he violated his agreement, then they may be in their right to force him to sell the team. But I suspect they will never make that decision.  

i think that if the NFL has any sense, they'll wait for the courts. makes it easier for them to make whatever decision they need to at that stage. but i suspect that the agreements the owners sign with the NFL gives them the right to make such decisions with or without the courts. and also any decision they like, notwithstanding whatever decision the courts make. presumably there is a clause about bringing the game into disrepute and the standards of behaviour of the owner and his associates. even if the courts give him the barest slap on the wrist, i'm sure that they can still act. and unfortunately for him, if this was three years ago, i suspect whatever penalty he faces would have been minor compared to today. 

i think the NFL see it as part of their role to control off-field actions by those involved in the game. and there is a good argument that they should, if they want to maintain standards. like it or not, actions such as kraft's, if indeed he did it, reflect on the game and impact on sponsors and that impacts on the bottom line. if off-field actions turn away viewers, it hurts the game. 

as for it being a conspiracy, i don't buy that for a second. first, isn't he just one of some 200 potentials arrestees? anyone really think that police, in a completely different state to his, are going through all of this and arresting and charging that many people just to embarrass kraft? that makes no sense to me. if it should emerge that his name was simple thrown into the mix to embarrass him then that would be different. 

secondly, don't do the crime. if you do not do the crime then you don't get arrested (one hopes). you can't set him up if he wasn't there and wasn't involved. 

[gcman68]

It should be interesting to see the result of this case but the strange thing to me is that by all accounts that he lives next store to a high end hotel called the Breakers. Assuming that is the case, and since money isn't an issue, he could have literally went next store to get an array of treatments presumably except one.  So ultimately he went out of his way 20-30 minutes each way and could have gone to a number of places in between.  To me there has to be more to the story than two stops to a place in a random shopping center that is not necessarily near his house.  

[El Presidente]

The days of "innocent until proven guilty" are apparently long gone. 

He should be stood down/stand down. No further penalty until the legal process has taken its course. 

[Ken Gargett]

6 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

The days of "innocent until proven guilty" are apparently long gone. 

He should be stood down/stand down. No further penalty until the legal process has taken its course. 

i do not disagree with that though may i remind you of our discussion re jack de belin/ben barber where you may have taken a slightly differently view re the standing down.

i think it is so much easier for all concerned if they wait to see what emerges from the legal process, which presumably would be more through and extensive than anything that the NFL might undertake.

the problem is that kraft would have entered an agreement with the NFL as an owner - otherwise he would not have been allowed to buy the team - which would allow the NFL to act and to impose certain penalties and this would be completely separate from any legal proceedings. he will have long ago submitted to this. so if the NFL want to act now, i have no doubt that they could. i am not saying that they should. 

and even if he comes back as not guilty or charges dropped, that will almost certainly not preclude the NFL from instigating any further investigation or imposing whatever penalties it wishes (within the limits of the agreement). 

[wineguy]

21 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

he has always come across as such and of all the owners, he seems one of the least likely to be caught up in something like this. but you never really know people. and i guess being a nice guy does not exclude such actions anyway. 

I would say Art Rooney would be near the top or on the top of the short list of owners least likely to do this....

[mrmessy]

People with less money have gotten off. Doubt this will result in much of anything.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[wineguy]

I think if he is convicted it will certainly cost him a spot in the Hall of Fame as well.

[Ken Gargett]

29 minutes ago, wineguy said:

I would say Art Rooney would be near the top or on the top of the short list of owners least likely to do this....

you'd like to think all of the owners would be on that list but humans will always do the surprising. 

[wineguy]

17 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

you'd like to think all of the owners would be on that list but humans will always do the surprising. 

Agreed.  I know Art from a non-profit board we are on together and we belong to the same golf club but I understand that anyone can surprise us....

[MountainMilG]

An article today on SI MMQB mentions that the Colts owner got the prior highest fine, $500k and 6 game suspension.  Also mentions Panthers owner being forced out, for ... well, I don't know what's arguable.  Bad things anyway.

I still stand by 1 million fine from the NFL after he takes his misdemeanor.  I think he still makes the hall of fame, but maybe he phases out visibility more over the next few years as brady and belichick wind it down.

[BrightonCorgi]

I did not know owners were in the hall of fame.  Kraft is a shoe-in either way in that case.  Could be 7-8 Championships before this Patriots era comes to a close.  

I don't anticipate any suspended games for Kraft.  I am sure they'll some kind of fine, but even that is up to speculation at this point.

[stunod]

I think no matter what, the minimum he gets is one year suspention.  Can not have any contact with team at all.  The fine is inconsequential.  Even if they fine him a million dollars, it a drop in the bucket to him.

The Commish is going to have to come down hard on him.  He hammers the players so if he goes easy on Kraft there will be a lot of backlash.

Let's see if the NFL can get this one right.

[ElJavi76]

So if this rich NFL owner is convicted of a misdemeanor... He should be forced to sell his team? Really? Can we make him sell his cars and his boats too while we're at it? I'm not in any way condoning the behavior of those exploiting these women. Kraft did that indirectly. What about those importing these women and keeping them hostage? 

The moral police comes out extra heavy. Imagine if you got convicted of a DUI and were forced to sell your car. What he did was not ok but we need to pump the brakes with these suggested penalties. I'm a Buffalo Bills fan. I'd love to watch the Pats implode but not like this. He should be punished like every other Joe Blow on that 200 name list. He's not any more evil cause he has all that money. He's just dumber. 

The real winner here... Jussie. This news just happened to break a day after his arrest. What a coincidence. LOL

[dominattorney]

23 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

i'm not talking about visa status, which i thought would be reasonably obvious. and it is hardly relevant is one is committing an illegality. merely that if indeed he was involved, i would imagine, although someone might be able to advise otherwise, that it would be fairly easy to tell the difference between a hooker who is willing and consenting and keen to do her best and some young girl who is there against her will. 

Not so.  Sex Trafficking is not what people believe it to be.  It's not like Taken where you wind up abducted from a hotel room and then subsequently auctioned off to the highest Arab bidder.  More often, victims of sex trafficking are tricked into indentured servitude in exchange for being smuggled into the country.  They are not going to act like they are not willing and consenting, at least not dramatically.  My line of work causes me to come into contact with my fair share of sex workers.  I can tell you that even ones who are in the business "by choice" do not much care for the work.  I  recently defended an 18 year old who stabbed her John when he tried to strangle her.  Thankfully the jury acquitted her.  Hearing her talk about the tragic series of events that led her to selling her body to get by was heartbreaking.  However, she needed the money, so it didn't behoove her to tell everyone she came in contact with about these things.  Smile and bear it, and hope they tip well.  Then hope your pimp doesn't skim too much. 

 

I say "highest Arab bidder' not to contribute to the stereotype which I believe is racially insensitive and dangerously misleading, but because that's what happened in the movie, which was a high profile production that dealt with sex trafficking.