Matt Araiza accused of rape, served with a lawsuit.

[LeGOATski]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

She had already spoken publicly about her ordeal, plus the full details of her claim were known in the lawsuit.  Why wouldn’t the lawyer let the Bills reach out to her, with the lawyer present?

Because the lawyer wants to control what is presented to the Bills and how it's presented. He has no obligation to open his client up to questioning from the organization who employs the defendant.

3 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Not sure about "setting up." IMO, he's very much liable for where he drops her off.  

She's contending that he set it up. The complaint seems pretty clear on that.

[Mr. WEO]

3 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

You don’t contact a civil attorney, whose  100% biased and being paid by a client to win money for said client, to do your investigation.  Especially one that has been contacting the team in an effort to spur and push for a cash settlement.
 

A third party PI was hired to do the investigation which is 100% the proper path to take in any situation like this.  
 

And the Bills decisions were based on that investigators findings.  
 

IMHO they did it the right way by taking it to a 3rd party and steering clear of a civil attorney looking for money for his client.  Her attorney has released text messages already showing he was pushing for a settlement and emailing the Bills and the Bills attorney.  

Where do I say that the Bills should ask the lawyer to do their investigation lol wtf?  
 

Simply interview the plaintiff.  

[mannc]

Just now, Mr. WEO said:

So they should have instead said “our investigation was limited to only the counterclaims of Matt Araiza and what we could find out second hand from others”. 
 

Instead, they said it was “thorough”.  That’s obviously a lie.  And ridiculous. 

Not at all. If an investigation explored all possible avenues, then it was thorough. Again, I don’t know if this one was, but the victim’s refusal to talk to them doesn’t make it less than thorough, especially if they talked to her lawyer.

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, LeGOATski said:

Because the lawyer wants to control what is presented to the Bills and how it's presented. He has no obligation to open his client up to questioning from the organization who employs the defendant.

She's contending that he set it up. The complaint seems pretty clear on that.

Then the Bills should say they did an incomplete investigation 

[ExiledInIllinois]

38 minutes ago, Shake_My_Head said:

I may have it missed in all 200+ pages (and counting) but there's another really relevant reason for cutting MA:  the 53 players who'll make up the roster, especially the veterans, who in all likelihood want this distraction to go away NOW in what's expected to be their best shot at a Super Bowl run this season.

 

The vets have no ties to a rookie punter, know this will be a season-long media cluster**** and are way more likely to push for it to be over so they can concentrate on football.   

 

While I'm at heart a "due process" supporter, I can suck it up and advocate for what may be an unfair, career-ruining decision that causes Matt's name to never again appear on a Bills roster if it means better odds of winning a Lombardi this year.   

 

Shallow?   Cruel?   Yeah, I feel bad.   But I can carry that weight...

He's a punter.  Already in a hermetically sealed tube on the team.  Make him eat at the kid table  on the road. I think we are overhypping the distraction.   A QB yes.  Punter... 😆... Except,  he will draw attention when he kicks from our 10 to their end zone.   Wallbash.  But I can live with that. 

 

Edited August 27, 2022 by ExiledInIllinois

[HankBulloughMellencamp]

3 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

No time for McBean to lay up short.  The time was before they cut Haack.

 

Laughable that the release of Haack should somehow make them pot-committed to Araiza's success or demise.

 

Haack is a marginal-at-best NFL punter, and that's why Araiza was drafted in the first place! 

 

And with your poor golf analogy, you're trying to say McDermott & Beane should go all-in on the 'punt god' who might also be Bill Cosby Jr. because they already cut Haack.  That's absurd. 👎

[mannc]

5 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

You don’t contact a civil attorney, whose  100% biased and being paid by a client to win money for said client, to do your investigation.  Especially one that has been contacting the team in an effort to spur and push for a cash settlement.
 

A third party PI was hired to do the investigation which is 100% the proper path to take in any situation like this.  
 

And the Bills decisions were based on that investigators findings.  
 

IMHO they did it the right way by taking it to a 3rd party and steering clear of a civil attorney looking for money for his client.  Her attorney has released text messages already showing he was pushing for a settlement and emailing the Bills and the Bills attorney.  

The Bills absolutely spoke to her attorney as part of their investigation, as they should have. 

[ExiledInIllinois]

1 minute ago, HankBulloughMellencamp said:

 

Laughable that the release of Haack should somehow make them pot-committed to Araiza's success or demise.

 

Haack is a marginal-at-best NFL punter, and that's why Araiza was drafted in the first place! 

 

And with your poor golf analogy, you're trying to say McDermott & Beane should go all-in on the 'punt god' who might also be Bill Cosby Jr. because they already cut Haack.  That's absurd. 👎

Absurd... But we might have a generational leg here. 

[Giuseppe Tognarelli]

I feel like the fact that he was in street clothes and the plate was taken off his locker tells us everything we need to know.

[Alphadawg7]

7 minutes ago, SWATeam said:

Seems like the situation was common knowledge around SDSU and should have been uncovered with pre-draft vetting.

Yet it wasn’t.  And I would not classify it as “common knowledge” because some students were aware.  It’s pretty unreasonable to think teams should interview the entire student base on every player at every college.  
 

That’s not common knowledge and not something that’s ever going to come out in any teams due diligence on a player.  The School and the Coaches did not disclose the story, no charges were filed, there were no law suits filed or even in motion, and no news outlets were aware.  Matt’s record at the time was squeaky clean by all accounts.  
 

So, it’s just incredibly unreasonable to expect any team to uncover a story like this that could only be uncovered if they conducted individual interviews of the entire student base attending the same college to see if there is any other dirt or rumors that no other part of their due diligence process would ever discover.  And then do that at every college in the country for every athlete they are evaluating.  
 

So hard disagree this is on the Bills front office for not knowing before the draft.  

[Livinginthepast]

As excellent as this regime has been in the past few years there have been a few curious hickups in judgement here or there on player personnel but this situation takes the cake. How on earth did a team that prizes "character" traits and intangibles not get wind of serious allegations of sexual assault that were apparently in plain sight. Did they attempt any investigation? And once they found out why did they cut their incumbent punter and stick with the controversial choice. What were the Bills thinking?

[Alphadawg7]

1 minute ago, mannc said:

The Bills absolutely spoke to her attorney as part of their investigation, as they should have. 

Not according to her attorney whose complaining he was not involved in the Bills investigation on social media.  

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, mannc said:

The Bills absolutely spoke to her attorney as part of their investigation, as they should have. 

Again, the alleged victim didn’t refuse to speak with the Bills.  The Bills never asked to speak with her,

[SectionC3]

22 minutes ago, mannc said:

So are you saying you think he was asking the Bills to pay to settle the case? That would be highly unusual, since the Bills certainly couldn’t be held liable for what happened when Araiza was at SDSU…

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.  

[LeGOATski]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

Then the Bills should say they did an incomplete investigation 

Okay WEO.

 

[CNYfan]

Just now, Livinginthepast said:

As excellent as this regime has been in the past few years there have been a few curious hickups in judgement here or there on player personnel but this situation takes the cake. How on earth did a team that prizes "character" traits and intangibles not get wind of serious allegations of sexual assault that were apparently in plain sight. Did they attempt any investigation? And once they found out why did they cut their incumbent punter and stick with the controversial choice. What were the Bills thinking?

I have to agree.  And our favorite GM, the wizard, BBB, etc is directly in the crosshairs of this immense faux pas.  

[RiotAct]

32 minutes ago, Bubba Gump said:

What I don't get is that he is a good looking dude. And yes, I am secure in my masculinity, lol. He could land any girl he wanted too. Idk why these guys get so stupid. They could have anything they want.

feeling of power, and the “forbidden fruit” effect.

[That's No Moon]

2 hours ago, eball said:

 

Why does anyone need to “pick a side” before the facts are known?  If the facts show that Araiza had consensual sex at a college party with a girl he thought was 18 and played no part in any alleged assault, does he deserve to lose his job?

 

I don’t understand the need to rush to judgment.  From what I’ve read, I think both of the lawyers involved have acted pretty terribly.

 

Because the Bills need to decide what to do. Whichever choice they make will be wrong in the eyes of many. 

[mannc]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Again, the alleged victim didn’t refuse to speak with the Bills.  The Bills never asked to speak with her,

How do you know they didn’t ask?

[SectionC3]

11 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

You don’t contact a civil attorney, whose  100% biased and being paid by a client to win money for said client, to do your investigation.  Especially one that has been contacting the team in an effort to spur and push for a cash settlement.
 

A third party PI was hired to do the investigation which is 100% the proper path to take in any situation like this.  
 

And the Bills decisions were based on that investigators findings.  
 

IMHO they did it the right way by taking it to a 3rd party and steering clear of a civil attorney looking for money for his client.  Her attorney has released text messages already showing he was pushing for a settlement and emailing the Bills and the Bills attorney.  

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

[FireChans]

24 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Limiting all of the Araiza talk to this thread is absurd/stupid @SDS. There are SO many layers to it. There will be 25 different conversations at once. How the Bills are handling it is VASTLY different from “who they might replace him with?” You also have the layer of “how much did they know and when?” “What did they know when they released Haack?” There are so many different angles here I can’t understand why it is all being jammed into one conversation?!? This thread will be 400 pages and talk about 137 different things.  
 

The “over moderation” led me to a couple of year hiatus. I enjoy coming here to talk Bills but want to “get in and get out.” I’m curious as to people’s opinions on very specific topics. I don’t care to hear anyone chime in on “how the Bills are handling this” or “giving him the benefit of the doubt” or anything like that. I have an opinion on that and it isn’t changing and will be a hostile discussion (but one that warrants a place here). I ONLY care to hear people’s opinions on other options if Araiza is gone. I know that others feel the same way. We should ABSOLUTELY allow multiple Araiza threads right now. It is THE biggest Bills topic with lots of arms and legs. My $.02.
 

 

IT WORKED. @SDS IS DOING IT. 
 

The King has spoken!

[ExiledInIllinois]

10 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

Crazy that this thread is over 200 pages and yet we all know the outcome. He is a punter (probably the least important starting position) and now a distraction to the team, and so he will be cut on or before Tuesday. 

Punter is probably most important.  Your opponents never having a "short field" is a powerful asset! 

[Donuts and Doritos]

Watch the McD press conference. He will get that every time as long as Araiza's on the team. Josh will be asked & Diggs, Davis, Dawkins, Miller, Oliver, every player will get asked about it. (Just like they did about Cole's tweets last year). All season. This is & will continue to be an unnecessary distraction. He's a punter, even if he can kick 100yds that is not going to be the difference between winning the SB or not.

[HomeskillitMoorman]

I just saw the way McD spoke after the game, I would agree with the people that have said his tone didn't seem very optimistic about how this is going to end and the implication was that whatever new news he says he got in the last 24 hours wasn't great. 

Edited August 27, 2022 by HomeskillitMoorman

[mannc]

3 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

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.  

Very possible, but that’s a dangerous game. Employer gets scared and cuts employee, there goes your settlement fund.

[Bob in STL]

2 hours ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Bills need to stay the course.  Don't cut.  They are committed. If he will work in the NFL... Bills took all the damage.   Not much more can happen to them now.  Get him ready for opening day and press on.  It's a civil case.  Unless it goes criminal, which seems odd it would go back that way, then cut.

 

Bills paid the down payment on his talent.

The “down payment” is small potatoes in the big picture.  It’s hard for me to understand that you believe this after watching McDermott last night.   Did you watch the post game presser?  
 

No doubt he was surprised by details that are now out there and he feels  this is much more serious now than before.  He clearly feels that information he used was incomplete or possibly was inaccurate?  I hope no one associated with the Bills had this information and did not flow it to him.     

 

 Even if they think Araiza might win the case, I don’t think they want the circus that goes with it.   
 

I see them picking up a punter from other teams cuts and moving on. 

Edited August 27, 2022 by Bob in STL

[SCBills]

4 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

You don’t contact a civil attorney, whose  100% biased and being paid by a client to win money for said client, to do your investigation.  Especially one that has been contacting the team in an effort to spur and push for a cash settlement.
 

A third party PI was hired to do the investigation which is 100% the proper path to take in any situation like this.  
 

And the Bills decisions were based on that investigators findings.  
 

IMHO they did it the right way by taking it to a 3rd party and steering clear of a civil attorney looking for money for his client.  Her attorney has released text messages already showing he was pushing for a settlement and emailing the Bills and the Bills attorney.  

The third party PI should’ve been able to at least find out some semblance of the story, but also that she was 17, no?

 

Im not advocating destroying a 21 year old for having sex with a 17 year old that allegedly was portraying herself as 18.  Anyone who is, I’m sorry… but I hope your child never goes to parties in college if you’re expecting ID checks before sex.  
 

However, if the Bills knew that the story of gang rape accusations were out there… and maybe they truly believe, or believed at the time, based on their findings that he’s innocent.   How did they think they could withstand the public onslaught from media and Twitter of both “rape” and “sex w a minor”.  
 

They could both be true or the rape could be false and he was misled on age … but how on earth could the Bills have believed they could navigate both of those allegations?

 

America in 2022… where the accused not only needs to be innocent, but able to prove that innocence within 24-48 hours. 
 

If he did it, then **** him and cut him yesterday with no looking back. 

 

If he didn’t.. well, we may never know. 

[CaliBills]

1 minute ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

I just saw the way McD spoke after the game, his tone didn't seem very optimistic about how this is going to end and the implication was that whatever new news he says he got in the last 24 hours wasn't great. 

He was definitely shaken up/disappointed/disgusted.

 

Like we all were.

[Mr. WEO]

2 minutes ago, mannc said:

How do you know they didn’t ask?

It’s been reported everywhere (just read it in NYT) and her lawyer is saying so. 

[Behindenemylines]

3 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

Because the lawyer wants to control what is presented to the Bills and how it's presented. He has no obligation to open his client up to questioning from the organization who employs the defendant.

She's contending that he set it up. The complaint seems pretty clear on that.

Maybe I am naive, but how does one go about setting up a gang rape?  Do you just call a couple guys-people you have obviously discussed coordinating a gang  rape with at some point I. The future- and say “hey I’ve got this girl let’s gang rape her tonight” and you meet someplace pre determined.  That seems just so out there but yet I really can’t think of what else “setting up” would mean. If this is the case then execute all three because they are total psychopaths premeditating such violence.   
 

Someone earlier said punter was responsible for where he dropped her off.  How and why? If he had dropped her off at her own home and subsequently this happened by strangers to him he isn’t responsible. 
 

So it leads back to him having fully and preplanned and executed his plan of gang rape.   
 

quite the well thought out statement by lawyer

 

i am not making light of anything I’m trying to wrap my head around this. If someone called me and asked if I was up for gang raping someone sometime I’d call the police right after I beat the stuffing out of the scumbag. 

[LabattBlue]

2 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Punter is probably most important.  Your opponents never having a "short field" is a powerful asset! 

Cmon man.  Even you don’t believe that. Punter is the most important position on the team?  😂

[ExiledInIllinois]

Just now, Bob in STL said:

The “down payment” is small potatoes in the big picture.  It’s hard for me to understand that you believe this after watching McDermott last night.   Did you watch the post game presser?  
 

No doubt he was surprised by details that are now out there and he feels  this is much more serious now than before.  He clearly feels that information was he missing or was inaccurate?  I hope no one associated with the Bills had this information and did not flow it to him.     

 

 Even if they think Araiza might win the case, I don’t think they want the circus that goes with it.   
 

I see them picking up a punter from other teams cuts and moving on. 

I just don't want a potential HoF leg used against us.  He either works for Bills or rots.  

 

Why are we the bad guys? Because Ravens and Bucs did a little more homework?

[Mango]

8 hours ago, Freddie's Dead said:

 

This statement from McD blew my already blown mind.  He almost never says anything of substance in his press conferences, but it's clear that whatever he learned in the last 24 hours disturbed him deeply.  

Likely took Araiza at his word and figured this was some he said she said. Or a small age dispute. HS girl shows up to a college party kind of thing. 
 

Then he saw brutal photos of a 17 year old who was gang raped….

 

I got the sense last night that McD was very emotional. And likely would have torn apart Araiza if left alone in the same rooms 

[Buffalo03]

15 minutes ago, HOUSE said:

 

So I wore this completely ridiculous thing .....just for you

 

You on drugs?

[Ralonzo]

5 minutes ago, That's No Moon said:

Because the Bills need to decide what to do. Whichever choice they make will be wrong in the eyes of many. 

 

That's the only thing we really can say with certainty at this point.

 

And that many people will continue to make conclusions and demand actions based on incomplete information of unknowable provenance.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Just now, BTB said:

Cmon man.  Even you don’t believe that. Punter is the most important position on the team?  😂

I do! Give me a guy that can kick a ball consistently 80 yards and I'll turn into Chuck Knox with Tyrod Taylor and WIN!

😉 😜 

[SDS]

26 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Limiting all of the Araiza talk to this thread is absurd/stupid @SDS. There are SO many layers to it. There will be 25 different conversations at once. How the Bills are handling it is VASTLY different from “who they might replace him with?” You also have the layer of “how much did they know and when?” “What did they know when they released Haack?” There are so many different angles here I can’t understand why it is all being jammed into one conversation?!? This thread will be 400 pages and talk about 137 different things.  
 

The “over moderation” led me to a couple of year hiatus. I enjoy coming here to talk Bills but want to “get in and get out.” I’m curious as to people’s opinions on very specific topics. I don’t care to hear anyone chime in on “how the Bills are handling this” or “giving him the benefit of the doubt” or anything like that. I have an opinion on that and it isn’t changing and will be a hostile discussion (but one that warrants a place here). I ONLY care to hear people’s opinions on other options if Araiza is gone. I know that others feel the same way. We should ABSOLUTELY allow multiple Araiza threads right now. It is THE biggest Bills topic with lots of arms and legs. My $.02.
 

 

 

I woke up to two complaints on my Saturday:

 

1. Is no where safe from the rape accusations talk?

2. We need 25 (or 137) different topics all talking about nuanced aspects of this issue. (Which, in my experience, is totally realistic given this community's self-discipline to stay on topic and love of nuanced discourse.)

 

The only thing I know for certain, is we are handling it wrong.

 

[HOUSE]

2 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

You on drugs?

no, i don't do drugs

[Mr. WEO]

33 minutes ago, NyBob85 said:

I generally agree, and if there's a silver lining from a football perspective it's that Araiza is brand new and hasn't had the time to develop many meaningful bonds or experiences with his teammates. If he had been a stalwart part of the team for a few years I'd definitely be more concerned about this situation affecting the team's collective psyche and chemistry. His brief tenure and clubhouse impact up to this point is just another reason to cut him loose now and keep his presence around the other players as inconsequential as possible. 

Name any team where, after their stalwart Punter was cut, their collective psyche and chemistry were damaged..

[Buffalo03]

Just now, HOUSE said:

no, i don't do drugs

I don't like your attitude