Offside Number 76 Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 1 minute ago, Tiberius said: She also accuses him of possibly slipping a mickey in her drink. Do they test for that during a rape kit investigation? This varies from place to place and maybe even from hospital to hospital. ECMC does not do so routinely; the patient has to ask for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I think the civil filing cost Araiza his job. That’s technically true, but I think the lack of a prompt and compelling response by Araiza sealed his fate. Maybe there just aren’t any exculpatory facts available to him right now… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CircleTheWagons99 Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 (edited) its coming!!! Edited August 28, 2022 by CircleTheWagons99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: On what basis do you believe that? Common sense, primarily. Do you think any high schooler would ever go to a college party and tell someone "hey, I'm 17. Get me a beer"? Would you? Then there were reports that she told people she was 18. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 5 minutes ago, extrahammer said: I'm going off of California law. The reason no case number has been assigned is because it has not been reviewed. It was filed Thursday and nothing was assigned instantaneously. The court could throw it out at any point as well. What kind of review process are you talking about? I’ve never heard of such a thing. Is it performed by a clerk? A judge? What are they reviewing it for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 5 minutes ago, mannc said: If Araiza and his lawyer had put together a more coherent, convincing response, the Bills might have at least let this play out a little longer. They failed. How? How do you prove he wasn't in the room gang-raping her other than denying it, which many people won't believe? And all people want to know when they hear "statutory rape" is "lock him up" without hearing context. Again there was no time for resolution so the Bills had no choice but to move on so it wouldn't be a distraction going forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 1 minute ago, Doc said: How? How do you prove he wasn't in the room gang-raping her other than denying it, which many people won't believe? And all people want to know when they hear "statutory rape" is "lock him up" without hearing context. Again there was no time for resolution so the Bills had no choice but to move on so it wouldn't be a distraction going forward. Araiza had at least a month to come up with a response, even though the complaint wasn’t filed until Thursday. They could have hired investigators, found witnesses who could back up his story. He should have anticipated a public furor. And Araiza could have issued a comprehensive denial, which he never did. His official statement was pathetic and weak. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
extrahammer Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 10 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said: Maybe, maybe not. Before her lawyer got involved this whole story was buried for nearly a year, so I'd say they've done a lot more good than bad. Regardless, what you think about someone's lawyer shouldn't have any bearing on the case unless they are making seemingly false or provably false accusations or are acting in a defamatory manner - none of which I've seen so far. If you cared about the victim, you'd care more about her attorney ruining her case by his contradictions. I understand it's your opinion he has not, but his track record shows a similar pattern. Either way, it's Sunday, and I'm going to enjoy my day, I wish the same to you. 2 minutes ago, mannc said: What kind of review process are you talking about? I’ve never heard of such a thing. Is it performed by a clerk? A judge? What are they reviewing it for? I'm going off of California law, the clerk reviews the complaint to make sure it's proper before assigning a case number to it. Dan cannot issue subpoenas until that happens. Even then, he does have to file a copy of EVERY subpoena with the court within 48 hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 8 minutes ago, Doc said: Common sense, primarily. Do you think any high schooler would ever go to a college party and tell someone "hey, I'm 17. Get me a beer"? Would you? Then there were reports that she told people she was 18. Lol. Yeah, no college aged guy could ever see that one coming. Some HS kid lying about her age. Also even if she did tell him she was 18 (crazy how some fellow SDSU football players remember that little detail) and he got her a beer (that wasn’t laced with anything), then that’s still a crime. Best case scenario for Araiza is that he’s guilty of some very bad things. Worst case, he’s guilty of some truly horrifying crimes. I’m happy he’s gone from Buffalo. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blitzboy54 Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 (edited) On 8/26/2022 at 2:04 PM, DasNootz said: the police report - or the civil complaint? police report, you know the one where the deceive was on the other line? “ Edited August 28, 2022 by blitzboy54 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jkjk Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 11 minutes ago, mannc said: Araiza had at least a month to come up with a response, even though the complaint wasn’t filed until Thursday. They could have hired investigators, found witnesses who could back up his story. He should have anticipated a public furor. And Araiza could have issued a comprehensive denial, which he never did. His official statement was pathetic and weak. I thought I read that they had hired investigators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 22 minutes ago, Offside Number 76 said: This varies from place to place and maybe even from hospital to hospital. ECMC does not do so routinely; the patient has to ask for it. Thanks Fred Smerlas! Just the other day that phrase went through my head, "Encroachment, number 76 defence" lol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 Just now, Jkjk said: I thought I read that they had hired investigators. They might have, which makes Araiza’s weak response even more inexplicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 San Diego State removed Zavier Leonard from the roster about the same time the Bills cut Araiza. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKBillFan Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 17 minutes ago, mannc said: They might have, which makes Araiza’s weak response even more inexplicable. Araiza could have held a press conference and gone through each step of the lawsuit, denying each in turn. He still would have been cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said: San Diego State removed Zavier Leonard from the roster about the same time the Bills cut Araiza. Well, they did SOMETHING. If I was running a university and someone told me that a gang rape may have happened with students from that university I'm damn sure certain I would have launched an investigation. They didn't. Unreal 1 minute ago, UKBillFan said: Araiza could have held a press conference and gone through each step of the lawsuit, denying each in turn. He still would have been cut. And if anything he said in the press conference was false, it could be used against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 2 minutes ago, UKBillFan said: Araiza could have held a press conference and gone through each step of the lawsuit, denying each in turn. He still would have been cut. Maybe, but if he had articulated a compelling defense he could at least have bought more time…he didn’t give the Bills anything to work with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Well, they did SOMETHING. If I was running a university and someone told me that a gang rape may have happened with students from that university I'm damn sure certain I would have launched an investigation. They didn't. Unreal And if anything he said in the press conference was false, it could be used against him. They said the police asked them not to get involved. I really don’t believe it to be honest. There is a major shift in college football going on as we speak. Over the last year conferences are being reshaped. San Diego State is a front runner for the PAC 12. I just wonder if this was kept quiet because they were having a good season and they want the PAC 12. Edited August 28, 2022 by Buffalo_Stampede 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 31 minutes ago, BarleyNY said: Lol. Yeah, no college aged guy could ever see that one coming. Some HS kid lying about her age. Also even if she did tell him she was 18 (crazy how some fellow SDSU football players remember that little detail) and he got her a beer (that wasn’t laced with anything), then that’s still a crime. Best case scenario for Araiza is that he’s guilty of some very bad things. Worst case, he’s guilty of some truly horrifying crimes. I’m happy he’s gone from Buffalo. did you just qualify giving a beer as “very bad things”? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yobogoya! Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 58 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said: Maybe, maybe not. Before her lawyer got involved this whole story was buried for nearly a year, so I'd say they've done a lot more good than bad. Regardless, what you think about someone's lawyer shouldn't have any bearing on the case unless they are making seemingly false or provably false accusations or are acting in a defamatory manner - none of which I've seen so far. I think the most he’s won with Araiza’s release is a Pyrrhic victory. Granted the spotlight is now hot on this case, but anyone representing Araiza in court is going to use the journal entries he published online to demonstrate how the accuser herself admits she was not cognizant at the time of the attack and had no idea who was involved. Seems like they just wanted to get Araiza cut, and they did. But if both the criminal and civil trials turn out to be duds, he’ll be punting again for someone in no time. That’s far from a resounding success if you ask me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKBillFan Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 8 minutes ago, mannc said: Maybe, but if he had articulated a compelling defense he could at least have bought more time…he didn’t give the Bills anything to work with. It's possible the Bills told him not too. Or his attorney (who isn't much better than the alleged victim's attorney) did. For his job, it might have been better to speak out. For his chances in court, it may be better to keep quiet for now other than the controlled statements. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanSD Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 40 minutes ago, BarleyNY said: Lol. Yeah, no college aged guy could ever see that one coming. Some HS kid lying about her age. Also even if she did tell him she was 18 (crazy how some fellow SDSU football players remember that little detail) and he got her a beer (that wasn’t laced with anything), then that’s still a crime. Best case scenario for Araiza is that he’s guilty of some very bad things. Worst case, he’s guilty of some truly horrifying crimes. I’m happy he’s gone from Buffalo. Giving an underage kid a beer isn't a very bad thing. It's like the least bad illegal thing that a college student might do. I'm happy that Araiza is gone because I'd prefer not to have a rapist on the team. I would be happy with him being a Bill if all he did was give out beer to high schoolers. Come on now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullBuchanan Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 3 minutes ago, Yobogoya! said: I think the most he’s won with Araiza’s release is a Pyrrhic victory. Granted the spotlight is now hot on this case, but anyone representing Araiza in court is going to use the journal entries he published online to demonstrate how the accuser herself admits she was not cognizant at the time of the attack and had no idea who was involved. Seems like they just wanted to get Araiza cut, and they did. But if both the criminal and civil trials turn out to be duds, he’ll be punting again for someone in no time. That’s far from a resounding success if you ask me. That was stated right in the lawsuit - i don't see how there's any contradiction or how her admission of being unaware of all the parties involved is highly relevant. That's what the police are supposed to be for. She claimed that she knows she had sex with Araiza (which is a crime on his part) and that he led her back to a room where she was raped (which would also be a crime(s) even if he did not take part). I agree that I don't think there's been any success here - beyond getting attention and public pressure on a story that a university tried to bury (yet again). However, that in itself is meaningful given what we've seen over the years as related to incidents of sexual assault. Had he made the team, he'd at least have a couple million dollars to go after. Now he'll be broke. Not sure why they'd want to get him released if their goal was financial restitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motorin' Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 14 minutes ago, Yobogoya! said: I think the most he’s won with Araiza’s release is a Pyrrhic victory. Granted the spotlight is now hot on this case, but anyone representing Araiza in court is going to use the journal entries he published online to demonstrate how the accuser herself admits she was not cognizant at the time of the attack and had no idea who was involved. Seems like they just wanted to get Araiza cut, and they did. But if both the criminal and civil trials turn out to be duds, he’ll be punting again for someone in no time. That’s far from a resounding success if you ask me. As soon as the Civil Suit begins, they can subpoena the evidence obtained in the criminal investigation. They are after the results of the rape kit test, which may or may not have even been processed yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 9 minutes ago, BillsFanSD said: Giving an underage kid a beer isn't a very bad thing. It's like the least bad illegal thing that a college student might do. I'm happy that Araiza is gone because I'd prefer not to have a rapist on the team. I would be happy with him being a Bill if all he did was give out beer to high schoolers. Come on now. Tip of the iceberg and all. Also depends on context. A 21 year old guy handing a beer to a 17 or 18 year old girl who’s already drunk might just have some ulterior motives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanSD Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 Just now, BarleyNY said: Tip of the iceberg and all. Also depends on context. A 21 year old guy handing a beer to a 17 or 18 year old girl who’s already drunk might just have some ulterior motives. Maybe, but if it were me, I would focus on the "gang rape" thing, not the "underage consumption" thing. I mean, really now. Underage consumption? We're throwing that particular stone? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 1 hour ago, mannc said: Someone WAY down thread produced a link that appears reliable, stating that the prosecutor has to prove there was no reasonable mistake about the victim’s age. Actually, it’s the defendant that has to prove there was a reasonable and actual expectation to believe the victim was 18 or older. Evidence could include attire, appearance, venue, testimony, etc. The prosecutor merely has to establish the victim was under 18 at the time. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 6 minutes ago, K-9 said: Actually, it’s the defendant that has to prove there was a reasonable and actual expectation to believe the victim was 18 or older. Evidence could include attire, appearance, venue, testimony, etc. The prosecutor merely has to establish the victim was under 18 at the time. Not under California law, apparently. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 6 minutes ago, BillsFanSD said: Maybe, but if it were me, I would focus on the "gang rape" thing, not the "underage consumption" thing. I mean, really now. Underage consumption? We're throwing that particular stone? Sure. That’s obviously the worst of it. There’s plenty of other bad stuff too. Might want to take off the royal blue colored glasses for a sec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanSD Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 2 minutes ago, BarleyNY said: Sure. That’s obviously the worst of it. There’s plenty of other bad stuff too. Might want to take off the royal blue colored glasses for a sec. I'm not being a homer here. No team would cut a player because they once provided beer to a minor. I certainly would not want the Bills to do so, but I wouldn't want any employer to do that either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 7 minutes ago, BillsFanSD said: I'm not being a homer here. No team would cut a player because they once provided beer to a minor. I certainly would not want the Bills to do so, but I wouldn't want any employer to do that either. No kidding. It is more that he gave an already drunk 17 year old more beer and then had sex with her. That’s not just statuary rape, that’s rape. Oh and he did so knowing that he had chlamydia. That’s all before he - or possibly someone else - took her inside and upstairs to a bedroom to be gang raped. Weird that someone else could’ve taken her to the room though. what would’ve had to happen was that Araiza met this girls, had sex with her and then just walked away as soon as he was done. Just went to hang out with some other people or something. That’d be very odd. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKBillFan Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 Just now, BarleyNY said: No kidding. It is more that he gave an already drunk 17 year old more beer and then had sex with her. That’s not just statuary rape, that’s rape. Oh and he did so knowing that he had chlamydia. That’s all before he - or possibly someone else - took her inside and upstairs to a bedroom to be gang raped. Weird that someone else could’ve taken her to the room though. what would’ve had to happen was that Araiza met this girls, had sex with her and then just walked away as soon as he was done. Just went to hang out with some other people or something. That’d be very odd. Any proof of any of this or are we jumping to conclusions... again? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herc11 Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 3 minutes ago, BarleyNY said: No kidding. It is more that he gave an already drunk 17 year old more beer and then had sex with her. That’s not just statuary rape, that’s rape. Oh and he did so knowing that he had chlamydia. That’s all before he - or possibly someone else - took her inside and upstairs to a bedroom to be gang raped. Weird that someone else could’ve taken her to the room though. what would’ve had to happen was that Araiza met this girls, had sex with her and then just walked away as soon as he was done. Just went to hang out with some other people or something. That’d be very odd. You're speaking on her accusations like they have already been proven to be fact. 1 hour ago, Doc said: How? How do you prove he wasn't in the room gang-raping her other than denying it, which many people won't believe? And all people want to know when they hear "statutory rape" is "lock him up" without hearing context. Again there was no time for resolution so the Bills had no choice but to move on so it wouldn't be a distraction going forward. Witnesses. Thats how you build a case, witnesses. 1 hour ago, mannc said: Araiza had at least a month to come up with a response, even though the complaint wasn’t filed until Thursday. They could have hired investigators, found witnesses who could back up his story. He should have anticipated a public furor. And Araiza could have issued a comprehensive denial, which he never did. His official statement was pathetic and weak. His lawyer did get an investigator that has interviewed witnesses. He's already stated this. You don't lay out your entire defense outside of court. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 5 minutes ago, Herc11 said: His lawyer did get an investigator that has interviewed witnesses. He's already stated this. You don't lay out your entire defense outside of court. Usually that’s true, but not in this case. Araiza was fighting for his reputation and his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motorin' Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 2 minutes ago, Herc11 said: You're speaking on her accusations like they have already been proven to be fact. Araiza's attorney disputes many aspects. He claims she was not intoxicated when she arrived and that Matt never gave her a drink. What he has not disputed was that Matt had sex with her outside of the house shortly after meeting her, and that she was later sexually assaulted by other members of the team. In fact, Araiza's attorney stated that one of the other teammates may be charged with rape based on the evidence he has obtained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herc11 Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 1 minute ago, mannc said: Usually that’s true, but not in this case. Araiza was fighting for his reputation and his career. His lawyer is a criminal defense lawyer. His goal is to keep Matt out of jail, not on the team. 1 minute ago, Motorin' said: Araiza's attorney disputes many aspects. He claims she was not intoxicated when she arrived and that Matt never gave her a drink. What he has not disputed was that Matt had sex with her outside of the house shortly after meeting her, and that she was later sexually assaulted by other members of the team. In fact, Araiza's attorney stated that one of the other teammates may be charged with rape based on the evidence he has obtained. Correct. Like always, there are three sides to every story. In this case: Hers, His, and the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 1 minute ago, Herc11 said: His lawyer is a criminal defense lawyer. His goal is to keep Matt out of jail, not on the team. I actually find it interesting he hired a criminal defense attorney. He was hired 6 weeks ago which lines up with when the police 1st spoke with him. I have to imagine someone is going to be charged with rape for the police to start asking Araiza questions 9 months after the alleged rape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 6 minutes ago, Herc11 said: His lawyer is a criminal defense lawyer. His goal is to keep Matt out of jail, not on the team. No, his goal is whatever his client tells him his goal is. If he wasn’t willing to fight for Araiza’s job, then Araiza had the right to replace him with someone who would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKBillFan Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 1 minute ago, mannc said: No, his goal is whatever his client tells him his goal is. If he wasn’t willing to fight for Araiza’s job, then Araiza had the right to replace him with someone who would. But attorneys, with experience of the law, tend to guide clients what the goal should be. In this case, the advice probably is staying out of prison/being found not guilty is more important than staying on the Bills roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted August 28, 2022 Share Posted August 28, 2022 19 minutes ago, UKBillFan said: Any proof of any of this or are we jumping to conclusions... again? They are only allegations at this point, which is what has made this whole thing so hard 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts