Can someone remind what punishment the NFL handed down on Robert Kraft for the massage parlor investigation.
None.
Of course, Robert Kraft isn't accused of sexually assaulting four women, either.
Certainly, but Kraft still warranted more punishment than he received for harming the NFL’s reputation.
I don't disagree, but that stuff gets tricky. If there's no complaining witness, the tape is destroyed, and Kraft doesn't cooperate, what evidence is there to make a factual finding (a precursor of any punishment)?
So the police had videos of Kraft paying for sex acts at the massage parlor on consecutive days, but the judge ruled it to be inadmissible and then they were destroyed. I don't see how that doesn't damage the NFL's image and he should have been punished regardless.
For what conduct, that is proven how?
For repeatedly visiting a massage parlor that was involved in and closed down for sex trafficking. Kraft may not have been found guilty, but he was still involved in the police sting at the location. He apologized for being part of the investigation. I don't see how that doesn't make the league look terrible.
CNN
—
New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft publicly broke his silence for the first time since charges of soliciting prostitution were brought against him in Florida.
“I am truly sorry,” Kraft said in a statement Saturday. “I know I have hurt and disappointed my family, my close friends, my co-workers, our fans and many others who rightfully hold me to a higher standard.”
Kraft, 77, was charged with two misdemeanor counts of soliciting prostitution last month. He was among the more than 100 people who were linked to several central Florida day spas and massage parlors suspected of being used for prostitution and targeted by law enforcement during a months-long investigation.
There needs to be proof of misconduct to punish.
What if all of those media reports turned out to be based upon a police officer's lie?
If the NFL could see the tape, I'd agree with you, but it can't because a judge had it destroyed. So, the proof that a arbitrator would rely upon to find that Kraft did something wrong is... ? Negative publicity is punishable, but only if that negative publicity is based upon proven negative conduct.
An arbitrator ruled that it was unfair to Watson to punish him beyond six games, because he couldn't have possibly known that sexually assaulting four women was prohibited conduct. What would a similar arbitrator find if Kraft was fined $2 million and lost draft picks because there's proof he entered a massage parlor? Because, that's about as much proof as the NFL had without the tape and without cooperating witnesses.
Is there proof of misconduct with Watson?
Is this a good faith question? I mean, are you oblivious to the entire thread about the arbitrator's findings?
Yes, there's proof of misconduct, which was put in front of the arbitrator, who made a ruling that that misconduct happened based upon the evidence before her.
In return for answering your question, I'll ask you one: how can you weigh in on this topic at all, without knowing the particulars of what was factually found in Watson's case? Before giving an opinion, don't you feel any obligation to educate yourself?
