SectionC3

Actually my point was that I'm not sure about the context in which your kitten statement applies. If you're asking whether it's evidence of a theft of kittens, I suppose it is. The problem is, in that context, it's weak evidence. We don't know whether you owned kittens, and we don't know whether said kittens were stolen. In a different context, such as one that considers the issue whether you're out of your depth in this area, it's rather strong evidence. So context counts.

I don't know the context to which you're referring, but her statement that Araiza participated in a gang rape damn sure is.

I suspect that's part of why practice was moved back yesterday, Araiza was out of the building, and the PC started as late as it did.

Sorry, but you're wrong. The statement is evidence. She said it happened. Standing alone, it's sufficient to indict and to convict. Or they employ arguably the best punter in the NFL and had no reason to waste time vetting Araiza.

Double digit isn't 31. Get on the phone and figure this out. Sounds like the Bills have a problem vetting potential draftees that they need to look into.

I didn't hear it asked as specifically as I framed it. As in, was one of those "double digit teams" a franchise that drafted a punter ahead of Araiza in this year's draft. The point there is that there may be many teams that didn't know of this because they had no interest in drafting a punter. But a few, including two who drafted punters ahead of the Bills, may have been aware of the issue in advance of the draft. So I'd like to know if those two teams knew of this allegation before the draft. Much more material than asking whether, say, the Seahawks (who employ Michael Dickson) were aware of this issue.

Define justice. Maybe he thought that nobody was listening to his client, and that her rapists were "getting away with it." That's no longer the case. And it is a form of justice. What's their goal? If it was to keep the kid employed, they screwed up badly. If it's to keep him out of prison, then staying mum is the best plan. I don't know what Cali law is on the issue, but typically the subpoenas don't hit the mail until the action is commenced. I suppose there could be a mechanism for pre-action discovery out there. Whatever. Point is, once the action is commenced and discovery proceeds Araiza will be deposed one way or another.

I don't understand your point. The prior poster indicated that there is no evidence that Araiza participated in the alleged second encounter. I pointed out that there is such evidence, in the form of a statement of the alleged victim. I'm not sure where you're coming from here.

Might have been a nice question for yesterday's presser. As in, did you contact the teams who drafted punters ahead of you to see if they knew about this in advance of the draft.

Except for, you know, her allegation that Araiza participated in the second encounter. Don't forget about that. Kind of important, don't you think? Nobody's doing that. We save that for the criminal courts. This issue has a lot more to do with optics and values and business. He can talk up his constitutional rights with the DA. (Or maybe he'll exercise them when he's deposed in this action. Stay tuned on that one.)

What's the point? Complaining that mere allegations cost him his job? We don't know that. Could very well be because he was not forthcoming with his employers. (And, I'll add, had all of this come out before the draft, he probably wouldn't have had this job and its tidy signing bonus in the first instance.) Because P's attorney is putting the screws to him? Don't need a finding of guilt by a jury of his peers to play hardball. In point of fact, these tactics appear to be designed to facilitate that finding of guilt. We live in a capitalistic society that, in his instance, includes certain workplace protections that don't apply here. He lost, and he was complicit in that loss. That's life. On to the next thing for him, which, at this point, very well could include time with the California Department of Corrections. Maybe ask for the pleading. And then, if you asked and don't get it, your GM and coach, instead of looking like idiots in the media, can say that they turned over every stone, asked for the complaint, couldn't get it, and were hamstrung.

To put the heat on Araiza and facilitate a settlement. Araiza didn't want to play ball, so Ps atty escalated by nudging the employer (which in turn, in theory, would nudge Araiza). It didn't work, so it was on to plan B. Destroy Araiza and achieve justice in that way. The first plan had the benefit of allowing P to avoid testifying at trial. But since Araiza didn't want to cooperate there, and P would have to testify, she decided to make things as painful as possible for him. (Just like, in her view, he did to her.) Hence where we are today. (And FWIW, it's exactly what I would have done. He said there was no chance at settlement, and he took her dignity, so on behalf of my client I'd take his, and then his job. The next step is to threaten his freedom, and the media releases surely have been noticed by the SD prosecutor's office.)

I still don’t understand why the Bills didn’t ask for a copy of the draft compliant. Could have solved a lot of problems. Or could have allowed them to say that Ps attorney sandbagged them.

Sweeney makes it because they’re not cutting a glue guy with all of this nonsense going on. Same with Shaq. Howard, to me, is toast. Not sold on Lewis making the cut. But maybe if they PUP Tre he hangs around for a bit.

Adios. They had no choice.

That will be the reason for firing him when they get around to it later this weekend.

Sure. Anyone can sue anyone for anything. But that's a lawsuit that undoubtedly would be quickly dismissed.

It's too late for that. The goal now is to ruin him and to have him incarcerated. He had his chance.

I don’t know what this means. The bills can nuke Araiza right now inasmuch as he’s an at will employee. That of course impedes his ability to settle. But that ship has sailed. It also impedes his ability to procure top flight criminal representation. Which, of course, may help P get justice.

Nobody said it was the first move. If the offer is no-pay, what does one have to lose by dialing the employer?

No. Absolutely not. Take all info. Use it to piece puzzle together. Major error by bills.

No. I’m saying he was looping in the employer to turn up the heat on the employee. Employer goes to employee, employee gets scared, employee pays.

Imagine that this guy hurt your daughter/cilent. Personally, I don't need the money and I'd move right to plan B. Either way, P's attorney couldn't get the money for his client to make her satisfied. So you know what my plan B would be? I'm going to hurt him. Bad. And for a long time. Do my best to have the ability to send him a housewarming card when he gets to prison. So the timing makes perfect sense. He took her dignity, and now we're going to take his. Hardball stuff, but that's what happens. You ask. It happens all the time in settlement discussions. Gotta show the principal (he/she with the money) how this is going to look if we don't settle.

From what I understand P's lawyer called the Bills first. That's a pressure tactic. And before anyone starts with the money grab BS, if this was your kid I think you'd be fine with a nice, healthy, extremely large chunk of money to help in putting her back on the path to sound mental health. It's one way of achieving justice. And it avoids her having to testify in open court and go through all of the nonsense of a trial or trials. It also provides closure. Failing success in that respect, it's on to plan B, which appears to have been retribution. ("You hurt me, now I'm really going to hurt you.") Whatever was requested is a sum that Araiza surely wishes today that he had paid.

No kidding. But there's ways to get a better picture. For example, getting his side of the story, then calling plaintiff's attorney and asking for a copy of the draft complaint is a good start. And then, I don't know, calling campus police, SD police, the DA, the AD, the coach, NFL contacts in Cali who may have private investigators out there, the NFL itself for PI help, the agent (not the friggin clown lawyer), and getting as much of a picture as you can from there. The face of your organization should not be discovery new information after the story hits the media. And if he is, then one of two things happened: you (the investigation lead) screwed up, or Araiza's team was less than forthcoming with you.