Robert Kraft’s lawyers argue that “irreparable harm” will result from release of video

Getty Images

As the prosecution of solicitation of prostitution cases continues in Florida, the biggest name among the many defendants continues to push to keep sensitive videos secret.

Via the Boston Globe, Patriots owner Robert Kraft’s lawyers argued in a legal brief filed on Wednesday that Kraft will suffer “irreparable harm” if the videos secretly generated by law-enforcement authorities of alleged sex acts become public.

The argument, made in the case filed by multiple media outlets (including the Globe) aimed to forcing the videos to be released to the public, is that release of the videos before the resolution of the criminal case would undermine Kraft’s legal rights in an irreversible way.

It’s a sound point. If pending efforts to keep the videos from ever being introduced at trial prevail, public disclosure would potentially taint the jury pool, making it much more difficult for Kraft to get a fair trial. Thus, regardless of whether the videos are disclosed at some point after the case ends, there’s no reason for the videos to be made public while Kraft continues to exercise his constitutional right to fight the charges.

After the criminal case ends, different considerations arise (including whether a court finds that the videos were illegally obtained). For now, and on the specific question of whether the videos should be released at this point in time, it makes plenty of sense to keep the video under wraps.

70 responses to “Robert Kraft’s lawyers argue that “irreparable harm” will result from release of video

  1. Comes down to whether Kraft had a subjection expectation of privacy. That’s a bit of a stretch given that the Spa was open to the public – and he was engaging in illegal activity.

  2. The only way it does irreparable harm is if it shows Kraft doing what he is accused of….

    But thanks, we all knew he was guilty before you admitted it…

  3. Evidence in high profile cases sometimes become public in some manner, usually by leaking prior to trial.

    I am not sure if we have ever seen hidden video evidence released before a trial though. Mike Florio would probably know if this ever happens.

    I hope at the very least these videos are kept under wraps until case is over. But to be honest, newspapers like The Globe have every right to ask for the videos to assist in their investigative reporting.

    Can’t journalists just view videos @ police station or prosecutor’s office and not technically be released to public?

    I remember years ago seeing photos of JFK in the hospital after he was pronounced dead. The photos of his wounds were pretty graphic. Photos I never really thought would ever be made public.

    So, don’t be surprised if these videos see the light of day. FOIA.

  4. Umm I thought he pleaded not guilty? So how can a video that “doesn’t show anything” because he didn’t do anything cause that kind of damage?

  5. I guess he has his reason, however he should know that the video will come out sooner or later.Bill

  6. Either the videos show what the prosecution says they do or they don’t. They either convict him or exonerate him. If all they show is an old man getting a message, Kraft’s lawyers wouldn’t keep trying to make the videos disappear.

  7. I think his attorney’s have pretty much caused all the harm he needs. By fighting this all they’ve done is confirm that what the police say is on the videos is really on the videos. How much more harm can be done?
    I’m more worried about the kind of person who would want to see this, and then admit that they made an effort to watch it.

  8. eagleswin says:
    April 10, 2019 at 9:55 pm
    Either the videos show what the prosecution says they do or they don’t. They either convict him or exonerate him. If all they show is an old man getting a message, Kraft’s lawyers wouldn’t keep trying to make the videos disappear.

    ———————————-
    If they showed anything conclusive then the prosecution would have handed them over at discovery so they could use them in the trial, and if something like that was handed over at discovery Krafts lawyers would be singing a different song. My guess is thats its somewhere in the middle, the video shows something, but nothing conclusive. Its the sort of thing one could watch and know darn well what’s going on without actually being proof it went on. As far as damage though I dont think its irreperable. If the video gets out (and it will, either legally or illegally) it will be nothing more than an extra round of humiliation. As far as damage to his reputation that ship has sailed. A video isnt going to make that any worse than it is already.

  9. Robert Kraft’s lawyers argue that “irreparable harm” will result from release of video

    ______________________________________________

    Now there’s a defense that would NEVER work for anyone but the ultra-rich!

    Does anyone still think that there’s not 2 set of laws in this country?

  10. set a date to release the video……

    and I guarantee that the day before Kraft will fold like a cheap suit the day before with an appropropriate plea bargain sentence….

    Then the NFL can add on a non-court punishment that is comparable to a similar player punishment….

  11. Law enforcement already had evidence by rummaging through the garbage. Violating Mr. Kraft privacy is extraneous. If they videotaped Mr. Kraft with conversation without his consent then the law enforcement violated the law. If they get their evidence by listening to them talk in the video then that can be inadmissible evidence. Mr. Kraft paid with cash. And they stopped his car for no reason. So what is the government’s evidence to prosecute?

  12. If he is not guilty like he says he is then he should have no problem with them releasing the videos since it would clearly show him doing nothing wrong correct? The man is guilty!

  13. Charges will be dropped anyways, just release the edited video so everyone can calm down and start drafting their conspiracy theories

  14. He literally was going to get nothing and I believe that they stated the video evidence wouldn’t have been needed, as there would have been no trial, if he had just taken the deal offered by the prosecutor. All he had to do was say that he would have been found guilty, and had zero repercussions legally. Now, he’s removed any doubt by saying that videos would be damaging to him, with the only way to read that being he’s absolutely doing what they’re accusing him of, AND he still is facing legal problems. Bang up job there, buddy.

  15. Evidence; once presented or released does tend to do irreparable harm to the guilty and invaluable help to the innocent. I guess we know what we need at this point.

  16. John johnson says:
    April 10, 2019 at 10:27 pm

    If they showed anything conclusive then the prosecution would have handed them over at discovery so they could use them in the trial, and if something like that was handed over at discovery Krafts lawyers would be singing a different song. My guess is thats its somewhere in the middle, the video shows something, but nothing conclusive.

    ——————————-

    Utter bull. They are fighting to keep the video out of discovery. Once it is in the court record it will eventually be released. It’s cute that you think there’s a 3rd reason but the reality is that Kraft is fighting to the bitter end because he has the money, not because there’s a problem with the evidence.

    The police want this video in the court record, Kraft is fighting tooth and nail to keep it out of the court record. Once the court get’s a ruling on the admissibility of the video, it will be handed over as part of discovery.

    If he would’ve just pled guilty the prosecutor said there would be no need to enter the video into evidence. He will plead guilty after the video is ruled admissable after wasting everyone’s time.

  17. If he’s innocent, what “irreparable harm” could possibly be caused? Sounds like ol’ Bobby’s a little scared.

  18. So what are you saying: if the truth is revealed it “would undermine Kraft’s legal rights in an irreversible way”? That is rich man talk for my rights are more important than yours.

  19. He should have considered the “irreparable harm” before he went there.,…. or maybe when he went back the next day……

  20. Patriots fans are awfully quiet on this particular comment section.
    —————-
    this fan only cares about the team belichick is building. ok by me to post the video, fine , suspend kraft, whatever. stupid, but I don’t care. all this enhances belichick’s power and may help the team win. I like to see belichick and brady doing what no on has ever been able to do before.

  21. I’m convinced that even if the video showed Kraft fully clothed, and the women on the opposite side of the room the entire time, there would still be people that would claim he’s guilty.

    Let’s face it….some of you would still tear him down.

  22. I totally agree with the lawyers. Let’s not forget the previous Panthers owner lost his team for much less.

  23. Judging from these comments no one wants to see the video anyway. Who cares if it’s released?

  24. If the video was illegally obtained, wouldn’t it be inadmissible?

    Anyway, the intent behind release of public document law is to protect the public from injustice due to suppression of information, not to give media outlets an item to draw viewership.

    If Kraft is found guilty, there clearly would be no injustice to the public if this video was suppressed by his request. If he were to be found not guilty, then the public may have a case with demanding the release of the video, to ascertain whether a crime occurred and justice was served.

    Why anyone would want to see an 80 year old man in that type of situation is beyond me.

  25. All American citizens should be concerned when a local police department places video cameras in a private establishment and seeks to use it for a criminal proceeding. Where is the 4th Amendment? Did they seek the court’s permission to place the cameras?

    Look, Kraft is the least of my concerns, this is an outright abuse of police powers and it needs to be stopped so it never happens again.

  26. whatjusthapped says:
    April 11, 2019 at 3:39 pm
    All American citizens should be concerned when a local police department places video cameras in a private establishment and seeks to use it for a criminal proceeding. Where is the 4th Amendment? Did they seek the court’s permission to place the cameras?

    Look, Kraft is the least of my concerns, this is an outright abuse of police powers and it needs to be stopped so it never happens again.

    ====================

    They had a warrant. What happened there will absolutely happen again as everything the police did was well within the law.

    There are plenty of instances of police abusing their powers, this is not one of them.

  27. @eagleswin

    They did have a “legal” warrant. But the sneak and peak explicitly forbade the type of surveillance the police were actually filming.

    I’m not sure why you are so confident the police didn’t over reach here.

  28. fenwickweb says:
    April 11, 2019 at 4:29 pm
    @eagleswin

    They did have a “legal” warrant. But the sneak and peak explicitly forbade the type of surveillance the police were actually filming.

    I’m not sure why you are so confident the police didn’t over reach here.

    ————————
    Some folks aren’t as interested in facts, or even whats right or wrong, as much as they just want a certain result. In this case a lot of people are hoping for a sequence of events that somehow results in something that might help their team against the Patriots. Other than that they really dont care.

  29. Keep filing legal briefs and they’ll eventually drop all charges and save the sheriff,prosecutors court and Kraft any more embarrassment!

  30. I agree. Irreparable Harm will definitely occur to anyone unfortunate enough to watch the video.

  31. How can he plead not guilty and still be worried about the video? He is part of the Goodell owners clan (despite the Brady thing) and will get zilch from the commish.

  32. What would be the purpose of releasing the video? Embarrass him?…kick a rich guy in the cherries? There’s no point to it other than that.

  33. Items of proof are a matter of public records in American criminal trials. No need to have it available if he pleads guilty but he says he didn’t happen. to quote the TV sports guys, “let’s go to the video tape.”

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!