SectionC3

It might not be all he said she said. To my understanding the alleged vic submitted to a rape kit. Without getting too deep in the weeds, that exam can establish forcible penetration inconsistent with consensual intercourse. Medical evidence of rape. Then it’s a question of who did it. That’s where DNA helps. Got tearing plus DNA match? Also then have a perp. Only he said she said in that scenario would be him saying they were consensual partners and physical injury caused by a different partner.

I have no idea what this means.

Let’s add that she’s apparently going to testify that araiza forcibly penetrated her. More direct evidence. This is not a circumstantial evidence case.

Who said there’s little direct evidence? From what I understand the alleged victim disclosed quickly, submitted to a rape kit, and participated in a controlled call in which an alleged perp admitted sexual contact. Let’s assume the rape kit reflects trauma, tearing, and the collection of a DNA sample. If that isn’t significant direct evidence then I don’t know what is.

What’s your point? They had a number that they felt would give them peace, it wasn’t met, and the game plan may have changed. It happens.

Maybe. Depends what he wants. Assume all of this is true and you’re the parents who are paying the bill for his services. If that was my daughter, the goal would be to ruin araiza and everyone else involved. So far I’d say this attorney is off to a good start.

You assume it was handled properly by the bills. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn’t. I don’t know. I’m a skeptic of corporate counsel. But, again, time will tell.

The inability to consent by virtue of intoxication is what’s on my radar now.

Assuming they did the job of investigating well.

Maybe. Maybe not. He’s setting araiza up to avoid liability for the forcible penetration that allegedly occurred inside the house. It’s early though. Time will tell. Let’s see what the DA does. that’s a legal analysis. Football analysis includes a PR/distraction component. Not sure araiza makes it to the field tomorrow. This is a big story and a big mess. It’s early, and he might be cleared. But I’m not sure the bills will deem him worth the headache.

Don’t know. It’s a fair question. Fury is the word that was used on the phone. Could be araiza. Could be the bills “internal investigation.” Could be the circumstances.

I heard second hand (from someone in Carolina) that McD is out of his mind angry about this. Take it for what it’s worth.

Not true. DNA isn’t necessary.

Hoax. Also, people would take you more seriously if you used in this context “hear” instead of “here.”

Hoax. There’s no BS here. And your hoax doesn’t trump anything. Because, you know, it’s a hoax. Better luck next time.

That’s an awful lot of hoax there. Do you actually believe all of this stuff, or is that a creative writing exercise?

Hoax. Also, your misogyny is tiresome.

By whom?

Hoax. I’m not bellyaching.

Believe it or not, I don’t want to the guy to be guilty of anything. (Again, I’ll note that watching him get shaved and squirted with a hose would be pretty funny. But I digress.) The reality is that if he did commit a crime of the nature under discussion, he would exposed the country that we all love to harm. That’s really, really bad. So (and I think you’re in the same spot as me), I want the chips to fall where they may, to let the investigation run its course, and to simply follow the facts to a conclusion that I hope reveals that he did not do anything to threaten our national security. But, like you, I don’t think this looks good for him right now.

That seems like cyber bullying to me. I can’t believe that you are allowed to moderate this forum. Hoax.

Completely agree. To my understanding, he’s also helped a fair number of disadvantaged kids get to college. That, to me, is pretty cool. But I think you’re spot on with Trump normalizing a lot of the BS—and encouraging the type of BS—that leaves Paladino’s mouth.

It doesn’t take even a few drinks. And I don’t dispute that he acts like an idiot. But he’s not an idiot. He does some really good things for people. He just . . . Says a lot of really stupid, hurtful, and inexcusable things that wash out the good that he does. Don’t get me wrong. I detest his politics. And i don’t like the guy much, if it all. But I really don’t think he’s a racist. A loudmouth bully who says way more than his fair share of stupid, painful things, to be sure. Definitely a selfish human being. It spoke volumes to me that his family wouldn’t appear with him in his campaign ads. But I’ve never known him as a racist.

Censorship is for the weak. America was built on the free exchange of ideas.

If you’re talking about Langworthy, I strongly disagree with that statement. He’s many things. But a racist is not one of them. I see parts of the world differently from him, but I respect him and his character and I think he will do a really good job representing his district. As far as Paladino goes, I actually don’t think he’s a racist. I think he’s a guy with a quiet big heart and a loud loose mouth who says and does some really, really stupid and inexcusable things. Unfortunately the frequency of such stupidity has increased. Or maybe it’s that recently people have paid more attention to the dumb stuff that comes out of his mouth. Either way, he’s cooked. And, I’ll add, given that I just saw the comment, his flirtation with “rigged election” BS needs to stop. Complaining about irregularities in the boonies is just ridiculous. He better be able to back it up, because he’s attacking the integrity of an awful lot of people if he goes forward with this.