Matt Araiza accused of rape, served with a lawsuit.

[ExiledInIllinois]

2 hours ago, UKBillFan said:

 

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.

Not seeing him play ever again, especially in a nationally televised game... OR SuperBowl and all of San Diego rallying around "the local connection" could be mighty painful if what she was saying is true.   Here's supposedly the guy that after six led you to an attack... And now he's  making millions. 

 

Just saying.  Poetic justice that he's ruined now.  He ruined her. Now she's ruining him. 

 

Hell hath no fury... 

[UKBillFan]

1 minute ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Not seeing him play ever again, especially in a nationally televised game... OR SuperBowl and all of San Diego rallying around "the local connection" could be mighty painful if what she was saying is true.   Here's supposedly the guy that after six led you to an attack... And now he's  making millions. 

 

Just saying.  Poetic justice that he's ruined now.  He ruined her. Now she's ruining him. 

 

Hell hath no fury... 

 

Temporarily. No criminal charges, or found not guilty in criminal court, and either settling out of court or being found not guilty in civil court and he'll have the chance to return to the NFL.

Edited August 28, 2022 by UKBillFan

[ExiledInIllinois]

21 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

 

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?

That's the most damning.  I don't know what to think.

[Motorin']

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

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.  

 

She said on June 3rd when she went public to the media that she was doing so explicitly bc she doesn't want him to play in the NFL and make money. And what she wants isn't money but accountability.

[Bills2022]

7 minutes ago, UKBillFan said:

 

Temporarily. No criminal charges, or found not guilty in criminal court, and either settling out of court or being found not guilty in civil court and he'll have the chance to return to the NFL.

 

Have to think they settle out of court. A guy with no job can't exactly pay damages to her.  The other two guys likely are broke and will have a ton of legal fees.  He settles.  She gets paid.  He winds up punting in the NFL in a year from now.  She then goes around selling her story and makes even more money and shows up on some reality show. 

 

America.

 

Edited August 28, 2022 by Bills2022

[Tiberius]

2 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

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.

Gang raps are not moral and is a crime. He seems to be connected very closely with a situation in which a young girl was brutally raped by multiple men. That's what the focus should be on 

Just now, Bills2022 said:

 

Have to think they settle out of court. A guy with no job can't exactly pay damages to her.  The other two guys likely are broke and will have a ton of legal fees.  He settles.  She gets paid.  He winds up punting in the NFL in a year from now.  She then goes around selling her story and makes even more money.  America.

These guys won't get out of this without serious jail time, imo. This was a crowded party, there may be video evidence and she was obviously brutally handled, probably chocked . 

[NoSaint]

6 minutes ago, Bills2022 said:

 

Have to think they settle out of court. A guy with no job can't exactly pay damages to her.  The other two guys likely are broke and will have a ton of legal fees.  He settles.  She gets paid.  He winds up punting in the NFL in a year from now.  She then goes around selling her story and makes even more money and shows up on some reality show. 

 

America.

 

her selling her story and him settling and getting to play probably don’t coexist in a single timeline. 

[Bills2022]

2 hours 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 

 

The fact that no criminal charges have been brought after nearly a year likely means someone is protecting the University or the girl has some history of making claims after attending college parties.  It could be both.  These guys are sketchy, but her lawyer screams lawyer/PR guy that is trying to make her famous. 

2 hours 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 

 

The fact that no criminal charges have been brought after nearly a year likely means someone is protecting the University or the girl has some history of making claims after attending college parties.  It could be both.  These guys are sketchy, but her lawyer screams lawyer/PR guy that is trying to make her famous. 

[4merper4mer]

Just now, Bills2022 said:

 

The fact that no criminal charges have been brought after nearly a year likely means someone is protecting the University or the girl has some history of making claims after attending college parties.  It could be both.  These guys are sketchy, but her lawyer screams lawyer/PR guy that is trying to make her famous. 

 

The fact that no criminal charges have been brought after nearly a year likely means someone is protecting the University or the girl has some history of making claims after attending college parties.  It could be both.  These guys are sketchy, but her lawyer screams lawyer/PR guy that is trying to make her famous. 

The time frame is not unusual for a case like this…..as sad as that seems…..the theories about protecting the university….while not proven false…..are lazy conjecture.

[Buffalo716]

17 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Gang raps are not moral and is a crime. He seems to be connected very closely with a situation in which a young girl was brutally raped by multiple men. That's what the focus should be on 

These guys won't get out of this without serious jail time, imo. This was a crowded party, there may be video evidence and she was obviously brutally handled, probably chocked . 

She went to the police immediately… Had a rape kit done, And gave a statement 

 

There should be tons of evidence to be able to get charges pressed… Maybe they haven’t pressed charges because they don’t think they can win the case

 

I just feel like if they had overwhelming evidence they would be charged… Not create a media circus to make it happen

 

Regardless It’s a tragic story

Edited August 28, 2022 by Buffalo716

[Albany,n.y.]

2 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

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.

Maybe times are different now but I remember the 1st thing they stressed in freshman orientation was the age of consent in NYS.  They wanted to make sure we knew that if we picked up a local high school girl we could get in big trouble.  

[aristocrat]

9 minutes ago, Bills2022 said:

 

The fact that no criminal charges have been brought after nearly a year likely means someone is protecting the University or the girl has some history of making claims after attending college parties.  It could be both.  These guys are sketchy, but her lawyer screams lawyer/PR guy that is trying to make her famous. 

 

The fact that no criminal charges have been brought after nearly a year likely means someone is protecting the University or the girl has some history of making claims after attending college parties.  It could be both.  These guys are sketchy, but her lawyer screams lawyer/PR guy that is trying to make her famous. 

it takes many months even years for some states to get rape kits tested. It’s a nationwide problem 

[Tiberius]

Just now, Buffalo716 said:

She went to the police immediately… Had a rape kit done, And gave a statement 

 

There should be tons of evidence to be able to get charges pressed… Maybe they haven’t pressed charges because they don’t think they can win the case

 

I just feel like if they had overwhelming evidence they would be charged… Not create a media circus to make it happen

You might be right, or maybe them suspects not talking are slowing the process down or there were others involved they have not identified...or maybe the family is right and the police are dragging their feet. Guess we won't know until the DA makes its decision 

[Matt_In_NH]

44 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Gang raps are not moral and is a crime. He seems to be connected very closely with a situation in which a young girl was brutally raped by multiple men. That's what the focus should be on 

These guys won't get out of this without serious jail time, imo. This was a crowded party, there may be video evidence and she was obviously brutally handled, probably chocked . 

Stats say otherwise. 

[Bills2022]

1 hour ago, aristocrat said:

it takes many months even years for some states to get rape kits tested. It’s a nationwide problem 

 

The rape kit has nothing to do with it.  Rape kits are useless when they already know who was there and what happened.  That is why they are frequently not tested for months or ever.  The narrative that there is a national problem testing rape kits is exaggerated by the media.  It is primarily for unsolved cases where police have little information.  Which is quite common.

 

This case is actually pretty simple.  It is about consent.  The rape kit is irrelevant here.  Nobody is disputing who was there or whether sex was involved.  It is about two issues.  1) Was the sex consensual?  2) Did the woman do or say anything that would have led a reasonable person to believe she was the age of consent?  

 

The DA does not need rape kit results to bring charges. A DA may not even want the results because often jurors acquit on a lack of DNA alone.

 

Where a rape kit actually is useful is catching people where a person is raped and they have no idea who may have raped the person. Frequently they can tie cases together and solve other cases.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 28, 2022 by Bills2022

[Doc]

5 minutes ago, Bills2022 said:

The rape kit has nothing to do with it.  Rape kits are useless when they already know who was there and what happened.  That is why they are frequently not tested for months or ever.  The narrative that there is a national problem testing rape kits is exaggerated by the media.  It is primarily for unsolved cases where police have little to no information.  Which is quite common.

 

This case is actually pretty simple.  It is about consent.  The rape kit is irrelevant here.  Nobody is disputing who was there or whether sex was involved.  It is about two issues.  1) Was the sex consensual?  2) Did the woman do or say anything that would have led a reasonable person to believe she was the age of consent?  

 

The DA does not need rape kit results to bring charges. Like I said before, many DAs don't even want the test results.  

 

Where a rape kit actually is useful is catching people where a person is raped and they have no idea who may have raped the person.

 

What if the rape kit doesn't show Araiza's DNA?

[Bills2022]

4 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

What if the rape kit doesn't show Araiza's DNA?

 

That is the problem with rape kits and why they are frequently intentionally not used by DA's.  Rapists often don't leave behind DNA.

 

It is irrelevant anyway.  Araiza said he was there.  He said he had sex with here.  He just said he thought she was 18 and it was consensual.  He probably is going to be impossible to convict as long as he has a good reason why he thought she was 18.

 

Edited August 28, 2022 by Bills2022

[NoSaint]

3 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

What if the rape kit doesn't show Araiza's DNA?

or in this situation he says the had sex earlier and he was nowhere near the seen of the gang rape. It would show his dna but absent a witness putting him there, he could be a much tougher prosecution than the others who have dna found.

[Warcodered]

Just now, Bills2022 said:

 

That is the problem with rape kits and why they are frequently intentionally not used by DA's.  Rapists frequently don't leave behind DNA.

 

It is irrelevant anyway.  Araiza said he was there.  He said he had sex with here.  He just said he thought she was 18 and it was consensual.  He probably is going to be impossible to convict as long as he has a good reason why he thought she was 18.

He hasn't come out and said any of that, it's claimed that he basically confirmed having sex with her via a pretext call the police had her do with him. From his side he hasn't acknowledged having sex with her at all, and it's only his lawyer citing having witnesses to her telling people she was 18.

[aristocrat]

8 minutes ago, Bills2022 said:

 

The rape kit has nothing to do with it.  Rape kits are useless when they already know who was there and what happened.  That is why they are frequently not tested for months or ever.  The fake narrative that there is a national problem testing rape kits is just that, fake.  DA's often hate rape kits because rapists frequently do not leave their DNA behind. Jurors then jump to the conclusion the rapist could not possibly have committed the crime.  A rape kit is useful when there is a dispute about whether the alleged rapist was there.  That is really what a rape kit is useful for. 

 

This case is actually pretty simple.  It is about consent.  The rape kit is irrelevant here.  Nobody is disputing who was there or whether sex was involved.  It is about two issues.  1) Was the sex consensual?  2) Did the woman do or say anything that would have led a reasonable person to believe she was the age of consent?  

 

The DA does not need rape kit results to bring charges. Like I said before, many DAs don't even want the test results. 

 

 

 

 

it’s not that simple. As araizas attorney said there was consensual sex before what happened in the room but Matt wasn’t in that room.  The victim claims he was in that room. You’re right that his dna could be discovered and it’s pointless but the da has to prove he was in the room. 
 

also, I read that araiza wasn’t even interviewed until last month about this. That seems strange as she went to the police the next day. 

[BarleyNY]

1 hour ago, NoSaint said:

 

 

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?

Not entirely. It is among the things that point to that.

[Bills2022]

Just now, Warcodered said:

He hasn't come out and said any of that, it's claimed that he basically confirmed having sex with her via a pretext call the police had her do with him. From his side he hasn't acknowledged having sex with her at all, and it's only his lawyer citing having witnesses to her telling people she was 18.

 

Matt Araiza has not been charged with a crime, but he has already admitted to one.  Sal Maiorana, Rochester Democrat and Chronicle

[PromoTheRobot]

1 hour ago, wppete said:

What happened? What did I miss?

 

Taking the Bills to task for not getting rid of him sooner, when they first heard of this case in June.

1 hour ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Not seeing him play ever again, especially in a nationally televised game... OR SuperBowl and all of San Diego rallying around "the local connection" could be mighty painful if what she was saying is true.   Here's supposedly the guy that after six led you to an attack... And now he's  making millions. 

 

Just saying.  Poetic justice that he's ruined now.  He ruined her. Now she's ruining him. 

 

Hell hath no fury... 

 

If that was the goal.

[djp14150]

4 hours ago, Rc2catch said:

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. 

The calls are inadmissible in criminal/ civil court.  Califotnia is a two party stste.

 

if no warrant was issued for the recordings to occur and they get released by her attorney then she and her lawyer can get sued. The police can never release that recording or put it in the public record.

 

if they do and they did not have a warrant it was illegally obtained evidence and they will be subject to ethics/ legal violations

[Warcodered]

2 minutes ago, Bills2022 said:

 

Matt Araiza has not been charged with a crime, but he has already admitted to one.  Sal Maiorana, Rochester Democrat and Chronicle

He hasn't admitted to that, that is the recollection of the pretext call being used in the lawsuit by the victim. Maybe that is true but as it stands it is currently disputed.

[Beck Water]

2 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

He hasn't admitted to that, that is the recollection of the pretext call being used in the lawsuit by the victim. Maybe that is true but as it stands it is currently disputed.

 

you give me faith.  in a thread where people who raise factual points are being teed off on by people with opposing viewpoints, you persist in calmly pointing out the fact: the lawsuit is a set of allegations, even if they are stated and set forth as factual and refer to recorded calls (which the police, not the plaintiff, have). 

 

If the lawsuit states Araiza said that on tape, at this point it is still an allegation

[Bills2022]

2 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

He hasn't admitted to that, that is the recollection of the pretext call being used in the lawsuit by the victim. Maybe that is true but as it stands it is currently disputed.

 

You may be right. I read Sal's article.  It sure looks like he said he had sex with her but he really didn't think it was anything but consensual sex with some college girl. 

[SectionC3]

34 minutes ago, Bills2022 said:

 

The rape kit has nothing to do with it.  Rape kits are useless when they already know who was there and what happened.  That is why they are frequently not tested for months or ever.  The narrative that there is a national problem testing rape kits is exaggerated by the media.  It is primarily for unsolved cases where police have little information.  Which is quite common.

 

This case is actually pretty simple.  It is about consent.  The rape kit is irrelevant here.  Nobody is disputing who was there or whether sex was involved.  It is about two issues.  1) Was the sex consensual?  2) Did the woman do or say anything that would have led a reasonable person to believe she was the age of consent?  

 

The DA does not need rape kit results to bring charges. A DA may not even want the results because often jurors acquit on a lack of DNA alone.

 

Where a rape kit actually is useful is catching people where a person is raped and they have no idea who may have raped the person. Frequently they can tie cases together and solve other cases.

 

 

 

 

The rape kit will include observations with respect to any injury inconsistent with consensual intercourse. 

[Bills2022]

18 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

The rape kit will include observations with respect to any injury inconsistent with consensual intercourse. 

 

The kit includes observations, but this is often just another problem with rape kits.  Injuries inconsistent with consensual intercourse are frequently used to portray victims as promiscuous women who like rough sex or lots of partners.  Rape kits are frequently a defense attorney's best friend.  If the DNA doesn't match or there is no DNA left behind, the defense attorney holds all the cards.

 

Rape kits really are not that tough to test.  Frequently they go untested because the DA already knows the answer and it does not help the case.

 

Edited August 28, 2022 by Bills2022

[SectionC3]

50 minutes ago, Bills2022 said:

 

The kit includes observations, but this is often just another problem with rape kits.  Injuries inconsistent with consensual intercourse are frequently used to portray victims as promiscuous women who like rough sex or lots of partners.  Rape kits are frequently a defense attorney's best friend.  If the DNA doesn't match or there is no DNA left behind, the defense attorney holds all the cards.

 

Rape kits really are not that tough to test.  Frequently they go untested because the DA already knows the answer and it does not help the case.

 

I’d be surprised if that was the case here.  The allegation is a gang rape. Report of leg bruising and belly button damage are consistent with that claim.  If rape kit shows vaginal tearing and DNA mix, the. I don’t see how that isn’t supportive or relevant.  So, yes, I agree that there are times when the rape kit is ignored bc physical exam and investigation suggest DNA testing is a waste of resources.  But this doesn’t strike me as such a case. 

[ColoradoBills]

[Alphadawg7]

3 hours ago, Motorin' said:

 

She said on June 3rd when she went public to the media that she was doing so explicitly bc she doesn't want him to play in the NFL and make money. And what she wants isn't money but accountability.

 

If true, that is still bad thinking on her part or bad advice because she could have had both.  Let him get paid, then after file the civil suit and take the money in court as that would still end his career and take away all his money.  Now she has his money and took away his career.

 

But that also doesn't add up.  Multiple times they were in negotiations or attempting to open negotiations for a settlement.  It was not until Matt's attorney recently told her attorney he will not be interested in a settlement that they decided to file a civil suit.  Her attorney even posted the text messages between the two attorneys confirming this where he was essentially threatening him to settle or else.   

[4merper4mer]

1 hour ago, Warcodered said:

He hasn't admitted to that, that is the recollection of the pretext call being used in the lawsuit by the victim. Maybe that is true but as it stands it is currently disputed.

But but but the journalist’s journalist Tim Graham said it was a “direct quote” from Araiza.  How dare you question the almighty arbiter or all that is true, Timmy?

[UKBillFan]

7 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

But but but the journalist’s journalist Tim Graham said it was a “direct quote” from Araiza.  How dare you question the almighty arbiter or all that is true, Timmy?

I presume Graham was referring to the lawsuit, where it states Araiza admitted to having sex with her during the recorded phone call - albeit not in a direct quote?

[4merper4mer]

1 hour ago, UKBillFan said:

I presume Graham was referring to the lawsuit, where it states Araiza admitted to having sex with her during the recorded phone call - albeit not in a direct quote?

Right.  But the reporter….who I think was Graham…..EXPLICITLY called it a direct quote in an attempt to “gotcha”  Beane.  It was weak, dishonest, and contemptible.  

[NoSaint]

Just now, 4merper4mer said:

Right.  But the reporter….who I think was Graham…..EXPLICITLY called it a direct quote in an attempt to “gotcha”  Beane.  It was weak, dishonest, and contemptible.  

from Timmy?!? I’m shocked. Shocked I tell you.

[Beck Water]

2 hours ago, 4merper4mer said:

But but but the journalist’s journalist Tim Graham said it was a “direct quote” from Araiza.  How dare you question the almighty arbiter or all that is true, Timmy?

 

Because in this case, Tim Graham is wrong

[StHustle]

13 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Because in this case, Tim Graham is wrong

If true, Araiza should sue him for defamation.

[Beck Water]

16 minutes ago, StHustle said:

If true, Araiza should sue him for defamation.

 

I think he may have other issues  to mind.  Just a hunch

[4merper4mer]

30 minutes ago, StHustle said:

If true, Araiza should sue him for defamation.

It’s right there on the recording of the presser.  A “direct quote” if there ever was one.