An appeals court on Wednesday sided with a lower court and ruled that secret video surveillance of New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft allegedly receiving services at a massage parlor must be excluded from the pending case and by extension the cases pending against other similarly situated defendants.
The appellate panel ruled that law enforcement violated the billionaire philanthropist’s 4th Amendment rights against unreasonable searches and seizures. The court noted that cops used “a phony bomb threat” as a way to install five hidden cameras at the Orchids of Asia day spa when the employees were outside.
This blog has covered this case here, here, here, and here.
Kraft, 79, a widower, has pleaded not guilty to two misdemeanor counts of soliciting prostitution.
After some initial saber-rattling, authorities abandoned a claim that they were investing human traffic at various massage parlors. Setting morality aside, it appears that the scenario revolves around consenting adults voluntary engaging in commerce.
The appeals court explained, in part, that the evidence is inadmissible in court:
We find the trial court properly concluded that the criminal defendants had standing to challenge the video surveillance and that total suppression of the video recordings was constitutionally warranted…
While there will be situations which may warrant the use of the techniques at issue, the strict Fourth Amendment safeguards developed over the past few decades must be observed. If they are not, any evidence obtained could very well be declared inadmissible as a matter of constitutional law. To permit otherwise would yield unbridled discretion to agents of law enforcement and the government, the antithesis of the constitutional liberty of people to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Consequently, we must hold—as every federal circuit court and state court to consider the question has—that this type of intrusive, covert video surveillance is subject to heightened standards and procedures designed to implement Fourth Amendment protections, particularly in the face of the constantly expanding use of electronic surveillance techniques by law enforcement. And where the government fails to faithfully follow these standards and procedures, it will be held to account by the exclusion of the evidence obtained.
In a concurrence, a member of the three-judge panel wrote that “Neither the Florida statutes, nor case law authorize covert audio surveillance to investigate prostitution-related offenses. It follows that the more intrusive video surveillance is also prohibited, providing yet another basis for affirmance.”
The majority opinion also pointed out that “We likewise uphold the trial courts’ conclusions that the warrants failed to contain sufficient minimization guidelines and that police did not sufficiently minimize the video recording of innocent spa goers receiving lawful massages.”
With the video evidence excluded from a trial, there is no way that probable cause exists either for the Jupiter, Fla., traffic stop, where Mr. Kraft was a passenger. Without these two pieces of evidence, there is no case against him. It’s a done deal.
According to media reports, state prosecutors plan to appeal to the state supreme court. With all the physical and financial crime occurring in Florida, it’s inexplicable that authorities would waste further resources on the case against the National Football League owner.
Immediately after Kraft was arrested in February 2019, the clueless sports media who forgot about the presumption of innocence essentially had him convicted and demanded he plead guilty. At least one activist group wanted the NFL to force Kraft to sell the team.
Upon the release of the appeals court decision, a spokesman for Kraft issued a statement that “This ruling protects the constitutional rights and civil liberties of all the men and women who were illegally spied on in this case. More broadly, this ruling will further protect the civil liberties of all Americans, by helping prevent future Fourth Amendment violations like those that occurred in this case.
