Report details how case against Robert Kraft could crumble

The case against New England Patriots' owner Robert Kraft could not be iron-clad, per a report in the New York Post.

The paper reported on Thursday there could be issues with how the legal situation could fall apart, according to legal experts.

The arrests stem from two misdemeanor chargers against Kraft for soliciting prostitution at the Orchids of Asia Day Spa in Jupiter, Fl.

Kraft left the spa in a white Bentley, owned by a friend who had driven him there and had waited outside. A Jupiter police officer then pulled the Bentley over on a traffic stop and asked Kraft - the front seat passenger - for identification.

The billionaire handed over his Massachusetts drivers license. Legal experts suggest this traffic stop could be illegal because it appears to have been done on the pretext of a traffic violation, but - as the affidavit states - was in fact carried out to identify Kraft, who wasn't driving the car.

The report quotes a high-profile attorney questioning the case.

Eric Snyder, a former prosecutor in the Manhattan DA's office and the US Attorney's office in the Southern District of New York, now a high profile trial lawyer, believes there are glaring issues in the case.

"Looking at the case against Kraft, there are a lot of big holes. First of all, the women he was with appear to have been operators of the massage parlor. One was arrested and the other one appears to be a cooperating witness which is why she is named in the affidavits but wasn't arrested. Prosecutors and police do not leave victims' name unredacted in the reports they release.

"There's also no proof in the affidavit that he solicited anything from the women. It is possible that this could have been a legal and consensual act between adults and there does not seem to be evidence to prove otherwise. So the facts supporting a misdemeanor charge of solicitation really don't jump out at you.

"Second, the video was probably not legally obtained, the police seemed to ignore the necessity requirement for such an intrusive measure like planting a camera in the premises." [The law stipulates police should only seek warrants for surveillance cameras if no other evidence is available to support their case, so Kraft's lawyers could argue the video footage is not legal and an invasion of privacy]

"And third, I doubt the traffic stop was legal either. So the evidence will likely be suppressed [by Kraft's legal team] if there is ever a trial."

To be continued ….

MORE:

Bryce Harper Watch: Philadelphia is melting down

Cole Beasley may not be out of Cowboys' picture just yet

Roundup: Michael Cohen Testifies, 90210 Reunion, AT&T Might Streamline HBO and Turner

Dorsey on Breshad Perriman: 'I would love to have that player here'

Steelers WR Antonio Brown clarifies his point on why he wants traded