Matt Araiza accused of rape, served with a lawsuit.

[Buffalo_Stampede]

8 minutes 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. 

 

We’ll find out a lot soon I’m sure. Her friends will be key witnesses. She says she was drinking with her friends prior to the party. She said her friend found her leaving the room bloody.

 

Im still wondering how she got the names of the 3 men accused because she says she doesn’t know who was doing what to her in the room. That tells me someone gave her the names.

 

 

[UKBillFan]

2 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

They are only allegations at this point, which is what has made this whole thing so hard 

 

Exactly. The way some are speaking it sounds like they've been proven.

[Motorin']

2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

We’ll find out a lot soon I’m sure. Her friends will be key witnesses. She says she was drinking with her friends prior to the party. She said her friend found her leaving the room bloody.

 

Im still wondering how she got the names of the 3 men accused because she says she doesn’t know who was doing what to her in the room. That tells me someone gave her the names.

 

 

 

Yeah, it seems as though she got the names from the police when they setup the pretext calls. 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

5 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

Yeah, it seems as though she got the names from the police when they setup the pretext calls. 

She actually got Matt Araiza’s number from one of the other accused players after the alleged rape. I don’t think police gave her the names. I think it was people at the party.

 

 

Edited August 28, 2022 by Buffalo_Stampede

[Motorin']

Just now, Buffalo_Stampede said:

She actually got Matt Araiza’s number from one of the other accused players. I don’t think police gave her the names. I think it was people at the party.

 

 

 

Yeah, these are the fine details of the case that we can only speculate about.

[Rc2catch]

How much are they asking for in the lawsuit? 
It has to be quite a bit or why wouldn’t he just pay whatever the offer that was withdrawn was? 

[K-9]

1 hour 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.

Any lawyer worth his salt would never let his defendant client give a press conference to answer questions about the crime he’s accused of. 

[NoSaint]

37 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. 

the weird part in the “claims he hooked up with a stranger outside at a party and then left” was that he left?

[BarleyNY]

4 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

the weird part in the “claims he hooked up with a stranger outside at a party and then left” was that he left?

Why focus on that?  The whole thing is pretty sketchy

Edited August 28, 2022 by BarleyNY

[Buffalo_Stampede]

Just now, Rc2catch said:

How much are they asking for in the lawsuit? 
It has to be quite a bit or why wouldn’t he just pay whatever the offer that was withdrawn was? 

It doesn’t sound like the father wants money. The civil suit at this time was likely just to put pressure on police, DA, and the accused.

[Beck Water]

 

11 minutes ago, Rc2catch said:

How much are they asking for in the lawsuit? 
It has to be quite a bit or why wouldn’t he just pay whatever the offer that was withdrawn was? 

 

A specific sum is not named

[Rc2catch]

1 minute ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

It doesn’t sound like the father wants money. The civil suit at this time was likely just to put pressure on police, DA, and the accused.

But don’t they have to attach a number to it? 
Im clueless in lawsuits but don’t they have to ask for something? 
And at one point there was an offer they were willing to settle for and her lawyer withdrew, at least that’s how the texts read to me 

[K-9]

58 minutes ago, mannc said:

Not under California law, apparently.

Here are the three things the prosecutor needs to prove under CA law. It’s rather easy to establish the age of the victim, perhaps the easiest. The onus is on the defendant to prove he had a reasonable expectation to believe the victim was of legal age. Defenses are also in the linked article. Interesting stuff. 
 

https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/penal-code/261-5/

Quote

 

1. When is it a crime to have sex with a minor?

In order to convict you under California Penal Code 261.5, the prosecutor must prove at least three facts (otherwise known as “elements of the crime“).

These facts include4 :

 

that the defendant had sexual intercourse with another person (any amount of sexual penetration, regardless of how slight, constitutes sexual intercourse…even if there is no ejaculation5 ),

 

that the persons involved in the act were not married to each other at the time (the fact that the minor is married to someone else or used to be married does not excuse liability for this offense6 ), and

 

that the alleged victim was under eighteen (18) years old at the time of the offense.

 

 

[Tiberius]

12 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Any lawyer worth his salt would never let his defendant client give a press conference to answer questions about the crime he’s accused of. 

Yes. One big exception to this was the guy who was accused of being the Anthrax mailer, he gave an impassioned news conference defending himself and attacking the DOJ. He was cleared after that. 

[UKBillFan]

3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

It doesn’t sound like the father wants money. The civil suit at this time was likely just to put pressure on police, DA, and the accused.

 

That's what the defense attorney says. But someone with knowledge and experience on here (with the best post on this thread bar none) suggested that issuing a civil claims means they have been advised that the DA will not criminally charge Araiza. If they were, then putting the alleged victim through a civil case before could open up too many questions and counter-claims which might leave it almost possible to get a verdict in criminal court.

 

Further to this, rape cases in the US take an average of ten months to go from accusation to charge - we've only just got to that point, time wise, now.

[K-9]

1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

Yes. One big exception to this was the guy who was accused of being the Anthrax mailer, he gave an impassioned news conference defending himself and attacking the DOJ. He was cleared after that. 

I’m inclined to believe it was the discovery of facts that exonerated him and not a news conference. 

[RiotAct]

4 minutes ago, Rc2catch said:

But don’t they have to attach a number to it? 
Im clueless in lawsuits but don’t they have to ask for something? 
And at one point there was an offer they were willing to settle for and her lawyer withdrew, at least that’s how the texts read to me 

I think in a lot of instances, the jury (or judge?) decides the amount that the plaintiff wins.  It might depend on the state.

[Buffalo_Stampede]

2 minutes ago, Rc2catch said:

But don’t they have to attach a number to it? 
Im clueless in lawsuits but don’t they have to ask for something? 
And at one point there was an offer they were willing to settle for and her lawyer withdrew, at least that’s how the texts read to me 

I read the civil suit, there was boxes to check. Limited, under $25,000 or Unlimited, over $25,000. Unlimited is checked.

8 minutes ago, UKBillFan said:

 

That's what the defense attorney says. But someone with knowledge and experience on here (with the best post on this thread bar none) suggested that issuing a civil claims means they have been advised that the DA will not criminally charge Araiza. If they were, then putting the alleged victim through a civil case before could open up too many questions and counter-claims which might leave it almost possible to get a verdict in criminal court.

 

Further to this, rape cases in the US take an average of ten months to go from accusation to charge - we've only just got to that point, time wise, now.

I read somewhere a comment from the DA that they are still reviewing.

[Rc2catch]

I said probably 50 pages back my theory was buffalo expected this to be settled out of court. It’s the only thing that makes sense to me based on beane and McDermott’s track record and the sloppiness of how it went down. 
Whatever the offer was that was withdrawn would of stopped this from hitting the media. Guessing that offer was more than his family could afford and the s*** hit the fan. This could also tie into the new information part as well. As maybe management was under the impression this was taken care of before the suit dropped. 
Anyways that’s just speculation on my part and not really helpful. The whole thing has been a disaster for everyone involved. In the end, I hope whoever participated in hurting that young woman can be charged and convicted.  

[UKBillFan]

6 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

I read the civil suit, there was boxes to check. Limited, under $25,000 or Unlimited, over $25,000. Unlimited is checked.

I read somewhere a comment from the DA that they are still reviewing.

 

Yes, so logically you would not raise a civil case whilst a criminal charge is still possible.

[Old Coot]

Can we merge this thread with an Edmunds thread.

[HappyDays]

1 hour ago, 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. 

 

A lot of college aged men (and women) who go to college parties have those same ulterior motives. Going to a party with the intention of having a random hook-up not only isn't a crime, it's a staple of the college experience for many people. As long as you have a reasonable belief that the sex is consensual there is nothing criminal (or IMO immoral) about buying a girl a drink and then having sex with her.

 

1 hour ago, BarleyNY said:

Oh and he did so knowing that he had chlamydia.

 

This is an allegation that has somehow become fact on social media. Allegations should be treated as such on this board, at least until there is even the barest amount of evidence that it is true.

 

Edited August 28, 2022 by HappyDays

[LabattBlue]

I don’t use twitter much, and I am sure those who do will link to the tweets here, but now that Araiza has been cut, I wonder if Abbott & Costello will knock it off with the twitter war.  

[Buffalo_Stampede]

5 minutes ago, UKBillFan said:

 

Yes, so logically you would not raise a civil case whilst a criminal charge is still possible.

Logically. I don’t know what the motivation behind the civil lawsuit was but if I were to guess it was to get Araiza released now.

 

The timing makes sense because Araiza was all over the news nationally the last week. Josh Allen calling him “Hold God” even made national news. Punters don’t typically make the news.

 

 

Edited August 28, 2022 by Buffalo_Stampede

[Rc2catch]

1 minute ago, BTB said:

I don’t use twitter much, and I am sure those who do will link to the tweets here, but now that Araiza has been cut, I wonder if Abbott & Costello will knock it off with the twitter war.  

Doubtful. Her lawyer was active about 12 hours ago. I don’t know how to link tweets I’m too old for this stuff lol. 

But his national spotlight kinda died the minute he was released. I don’t care about the civil part but hopefully the media cycle was enough to pressure criminal charges on the case 

[UKBillFan]

3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Logically. I don’t know what the motivation behind the civil lawsuit was but if I were to guess it was to get Araiza released now.

 

The timing makes sense because Araiza was all over the news nationally the last week. Josh Allen calling him “Hold God” even made national news. Punters don’t typically make the news.

 

 

 

Yes, I feel the whole thing was to get Araiza cut, but I'm not sure if it's the best for this client long term.

[LabattBlue]

1 minute ago, Rc2catch said:

Doubtful. Her lawyer was active about 12 hours ago. I don’t know how to link tweets I’m too old for this stuff lol. 

But his national spotlight kinda died the minute he was released. I don’t care about the civil part but hopefully the media cycle was enough to pressure criminal charges on the case 

I am not sure media pressure will do the trick.  The last think a DA wants is a case that cannot be won.  If it was a winnable case, wouldn’t the criminal charges have happened by now?

[HappyDays]

29 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Why focus on that?  The whole thing is pretty sketchy

 

It's become clear from your posts in this thread that you think random sex between strangers at college parties is inherently sketchy. It's fine if you believe that. But it isn't a crime or inherently immoral. If the worst thing Araiza is guilty of is giving a drink to a girl at a college party without asking for her ID and then having sex with her I don't think that rises to the level of career-ending offense. And if it does, I can't even imagine how many NFL players should be unemployed right now.

 

For most of us when we are ascribing guilt or innocence to a person's actions we try to compare it with what an average person would do in that same situation. We don't compare it to some ideal moral do-gooder who follows every law to the letter.

[PromoTheRobot]

3 minutes ago, Rc2catch said:

Doubtful. Her lawyer was active about 12 hours ago. I don’t know how to link tweets I’m too old for this stuff lol. 

But his national spotlight kinda died the minute he was released. I don’t care about the civil part but hopefully the media cycle was enough to pressure criminal charges on the case 

 

All you have to do is copy the link to the tweet and paste it here. Sometimes you have to also hit "enter" to make the tweet appear.

[Rc2catch]

Just now, BTB said:

I am not sure media pressure will do the trick.  The last think a DA wants is a case that cannot be won.  If it was a winnable case, wouldn’t the criminal charges have happened by now?

There’s a lot of debate about that. But it does take a long time to go from rape to charges filed sometimes. It was mentioned earlier 10 months is about the timeline and that’s where it’s at. 
Those phone recordings are probably the biggest key to all of this. 
I would like to see a transcript of those calls one day vs what her recollection was in the lawsuit and see if/what the differences are. 

The whole thing was bad and ugly, but her recollection of what was said on those phone calls is what killed him in the public. 

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

4 hours ago, CoudyBills said:

Backlash for waiting until a civil suit or a criminal case was brought?  That's asinine.

The CBA change seems to really be throwing people for a loop on the optics of this one.  If that event happened while he was in the nfl he undoubtedly would’ve been suspended indefinitely until the criminal/civil cases were resolved and there would’ve been nothing to read into regarding how the bills handled it.   that can’t be done anymore for events that occurred in college for nfl players 

[Since1981]

18 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Punters don’t typically make the news.

Can you imagine how infuriating that positive Punt PR last week would be to someone in her (her dad’s) situation.
Add to it—>dreadfully slow criminal PD,+ civil lawsuit file date closes in 6 wks/1yr

Edited August 28, 2022 by Since1981

[NoSaint]

50 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Why focus on that?  The whole thing is pretty sketchy

you called it out as proof he probably led her to a gang rape. So I’d say you focused on it as a pretty key point and I’m just questioning that as the item that ties the whole night together. 

[T master]

On 8/25/2022 at 10:10 PM, Mango said:

Tell me you haven’t read anything about this case without telling me you’ve put forth zero effort. 

 

No i don't know a lot about it Happy now ??? That's why i asked what i did .

[BarleyNY]

53 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

you called it out as proof he probably led her to a gang rape. So I’d say you focused on it as a pretty key point and I’m just questioning that as the item that ties the whole night together. 

If that’s what you took away from all of this then I’d say your reading comprehension is as poor as your objectivity. 

[Alphadawg7]

59 minutes ago, Rc2catch said:

Doubtful. Her lawyer was active about 12 hours ago. I don’t know how to link tweets I’m too old for this stuff lol. 

But his national spotlight kinda died the minute he was released. I don’t care about the civil part but hopefully the media cycle was enough to pressure criminal charges on the case 

 

Agreed, look at her lawyers tweets...he tries every case in the court of public opinion, its literally his primary tactic.

 

I still don't understand why her attorney was so foolish to file the civil suit before Matt was further into a better financial situation.  His job is to get as much money as he can for his client, so the timing seems like a poor decision for what was in the best interest of his client.  And based on these two idiot lawyers pissing competition in text and social media, it almost seems like he was reacting to that more than making the best choices for his client.  

 

Both these idiot lawyers are not doing anything positive for the images of their respective professions as a whole.  

[Warriorspikes51]

I see Jay Skurski, Matt Fairburn and others are showing themselves to be FAKE NEWS. These clowns live for this crap

[NoSaint]

1 hour ago, BarleyNY said:

If that’s what you took away from all of this then I’d say your reading comprehension is as poor as your objectivity. 

 

3 hours 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. 

 

so you aren’t hanging your assessment of his participation in the second set of events heavily on it being “very odd” to hook up with her earlier and then leave?

[wppete]

1 hour ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

I see Jay Skurski, Matt Fairburn and others are showing themselves to be FAKE NEWS. These clowns live for this crap

What happened? What did I miss?

[78thealltimegreat]

2 hours ago, BTB said:

I am not sure media pressure will do the trick.  The last think a DA wants is a case that cannot be won.  If it was a winnable case, wouldn’t the criminal charges have happened by now?

You are correct if Matt’s DNA isn’t in the rape kit and she doesn’t have eye witness accounts they really have no case against him now the other guys that’s a different story