Matt Araiza accused of rape, served with a lawsuit.

[UKBillFan]

2 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

I’m not saying that it is right, because it’s not. It is how things are done though. When it’s Ben Roethlisberger raping some girl in a bar restroom (second well know incident of that kind and third if you dig deeper), then it’s different to the business owners and a substantial effort is made with regards to the public narrative. But for any punter or fairly easily replaced player or coach, that’s not going to happen. 

And yet Beane didn’t take the easy route out which I kind of respect him for - as long as his judgement is proved correct. He’s put a lot in the investigation undertaken by the Bills.

[damj]

If it's confirmed he admitted to sex on the pretext call, then that's statuatory rape and he should be cut. Let the legal system play out for guilt or innocence on the rape charges

[JoPoy88]

Just now, BTB said:

So prior to the draft, Araiza informed the NFL of the rape investigation, and the Bills still chose him.  In that case, the Bills deserve all the bad publicity & media scrutiny that will come from this mess.  

Who is claiming this? 

[StHustle]

10 minutes ago, Mango said:

 

I mean this in the absolute worst way possible. You are a terrifying human being. 

not taking his side but I’ve actually found most women prefer rough sex (didn’t learn this until in my 30s) but not to the extent of bruising and bleeding. But I have witnessed (the aftermath) multiple times in my life where consensual rough sex resulted in bruising. I would leave it up to a female poster to say if they’ve experienced vaginal bleeding from rough sex.

 

With all that said…there is a good chance she was raped that night…the question is who the culprit(s) was/were. Things can get awfully crazy at college parties. Once a girl I had sex with at a party…woke up next morning to find her in bed with my buddy. Totally consensual but was a wake up call for me in many ways. I’ll leave it at that.

 

 

Edited August 26, 2022 by StHustle

[hondo in seattle]

One of the reasons I think Araiza might be innocent is that he refused to settle out of court and compensate the accuser for her silence.

 

I'd never do such a thing but if I was guilty, I gladly pay to make the whole thing go away.  If was innocent, I'd fight on principle.  

 

www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/bills-have-known-about-rape-allegations-against-matt-araiza-since-july/ar-AA118cCJ

 

 

 

 

[NyBob85]

16 hours ago, Stokes84 said:

I’m on the “cut him regardless” train. Might not be fair, but he’s a punter who hasn’t earned anything, but brings unneeded drama.  People get cut for a lot less.

 

Likewise. In an absolute BEST case scenario he was messing around with a girl he knew to be in high school while he was a college senior and is still guilty of statutory rape. And that's only giving him the very generous benefit of the doubt that he had absolutely nothing to do with her being assaulted or forcibly raped by the other two, which is highly improbable at best. Even in a best case scenario he's pretty much admitted to committing a felony and has clearly demonstrated that he has a SEVERE deficiency in his decision-making abilities and is a creep by messing around with high school girls when he could easily sleep with any number of adult women his age consensually. In a worst case scenario he's a violent predator and a monster many times worse than DeShaun Watson. Either way he needs to go. The Bills can foster a lot of goodwill with the media and the fanbase and not only salvage but greatly improve their image if they send him packing right now. If not we look no better than any of the countless other teams who have scrambled to cover for the sex pests and abusers in their ranks. I'd prefer not to have any toxic presence surrounding the club or lingering around the locker room all season just so we can keep a good PUNTER on the roster. Let's cut our losses, find some halfway-serviceable punter among the free agents who can get up to speed in two weeks and move the hell on as quickly as we can. 

[Donuts and Doritos]

2 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:

NY law does not matter in the slightest. Age of consent in CA is 18.

 

1 minute ago, BillsFanSD said:

I don't think it matters morally, but in California the age of consent is 18 and they don't have a "Romeo & Juliet" exception.  Technically a 21 year old who has sex with a 17 year old in the Golden State is guilty of statutory rape regardless.

 

Again, not saying it matters, because this particular angle doesn't matter to me at all.  In most states, something like this would be legal.  CA law is just a little on the weird side. 

Ok, makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. Given the reports of his admissions to sexual contact in the recorded controlled call, sounds like he might be cooked on that charge.

[Draconator]

3 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

Yeah... Can't remember,  that was a bizarre story like this one. 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2584179-patrick-kane-under-investigation-for-rape-latest-details-comments-reaction

 

Chicago Blackhawks right winger Patrick Kane will not face charges after being investigated for sexual assault.

 

"The totality of the credible evidence—the proof—does not sufficiently substantiate the complainant’s allegation that she was raped by Patrick Kane and this so-called 'case' is rife with reasonable doubt," Erie County District Attorney Frank A. Sedita III said in a statement. "Accordingly, the Office of the Erie County District Attorney will not present this matter to an Erie County Grand Jury."

 

The announcement came after Kane's accuser reportedly told authorities on Tuesday she no longer wanted to cooperate with the investigation into the Blackhawks star.

[Wayne Arnold]

2 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Terrific.  Now do the part again about how Haack immediately got picked up.  What was your source on that?

 

Haack pretty much stinks and was probably the most replaceable player on last year’s 53.  He seems like a pretty good guy but losing out on the opportunity to keep him is the least impactful portion of this situation by a light year.

 

 

He was signed two days after getting cut but I get your point. You can do much worse than Haack is all I'm saying.

[Logic]

109 pages in 17 hours. Gotta be a TSW record.

This one's going to be hard to ever definitively prove one way or the other, as rape accusations of this nature often are.

The question, then, is do the Bills want to stand by Araiza, weather the firestorm of criticism and distraction and the hit to their reputation? Or, instead, do they figure that a punter isn't worth the headaches this matter is about to cause?

Even if one removes moral and ethical implications and looks at the matter strictly from a cynical, practical point of view, it seems to me that a rookie punter is NOT worth the headaches this matter is about to cause. Further, I would say that who is punting for the Bills will likely have very little impact on their Super Bowl chances over the next five years.

Cut him, sign a mediocre, boring veteran, and move on. Set a precedent. Be better than the Browns and the Commanders of the world. Be better.

[LabattBlue]

1 minute ago, JoPoy88 said:

Who is claiming this? 

https://twitter.com/bytimgraham/status/1563135906717917184?s=21&t=rcs5Lxx7QJ1w0ixg8hFyMA

[Bangarang]

Jane Doe’s lawyer posting personal conversations and the victim’s diary, which seems very suspect and forced, all over Twitter is such a scumbag thing. 
 

He’s acting like a complete clown. 

[4merper4mer]

1 minute ago, Wayne Arnold said:

 

Based on what's out there now, I can't imagine how he could be so confident. And their silence over the last 12+ hours is deafening. They should've been ready to immediately come out with a statement how they know Araiza is innocent. 

And they should also have a web site up with free access to Kim Pegula’s medical records right?  
 

12 hours of silence is deafening?  12 hours?  Consider that anything they say or do has potential impact on whether they could be party to a civil suit and at what level…..or at least they have to protect against that.  The lawyers for both parties here are clearly loose cannons.  There is no need for the Bills to turn into a third one.

[UKBillFan]

6 minutes ago, SirAndrew said:

I’ve always found it interesting how fans give athletes and celebrities the benefit of doubt. I agree, we don’t know the facts, he may be an innocent man. However, people never view the average Joe that way. It’s likely if this situation involves a person of little means in a random town (not a college athlete) he would have been locked up and his life is over. No one even cares to give that guy a chance. The report would be read, and people say he’s a menace. I want to wait for the all the facts to come out before I judge, but it seems like college boys get the benefit of doubt that others don’t. 

Rape convictions are at a historical low, in the U.K. at least. I think most people leave it up to the legal system to decide whether someone is innocent or guilty.

[Jerboski]

Cut this kid… not worth the trouble and seems like that incident is highly suspect at best, and downright horrific if true 

[SirAndrew]

1 minute ago, BillsFanSD said:

I've terminated people for sexual misconduct, and I can tell you that this is not true.  My organization (a public university, which is relevant here) does not dismiss people just because they were sued in civil court.  We need something beyond that.

I agree, that’s how employment works, but I was commenting more on the court of public opinion. I’m making the point that we never know with certainty what occurs at places we aren’t present. Yet fans like to give athletes the benefit of doubt. If he were a random dude, and that story makes the newspaper, everyone would agree he’s a terrible person, even if it’s not true. Athletes always have a choir of defenders. 

[Draconator]

1 minute ago, 4merper4mer said:

The lawyers for both parties here are clearly loose cannons.  There is no need for the Bills to turn into a third one.

Amen! I mean there is no way in hell I would want Jimmy Haslem to be the voice of my team. 

[UKBillFan]

6 minutes ago, BTB said:

So prior to the draft, Araiza informed the NFL of the rape investigation, and the Bills still chose him.  In that case, the Bills deserve all the bad publicity & media scrutiny that will come from this mess.  

According to Tim Graham, the NFL and franchises did not about it pre-draft, which obviously goes against what the defence attorney is saying.

[JoPoy88]

1 minute ago, BTB said:

https://twitter.com/bytimgraham/status/1563135906717917184?s=21&t=rcs5Lxx7QJ1w0ixg8hFyMA

forgot his lawyer made that claim thanks. Question still remains if the league passed the notification on to individual teams though. That’s less clear. Other statements suggest the Bills found out about this around 6 weeks ago, well after the draft.

[AuntieEm]

44 minutes ago, CountDorkula said:

the ol' its partially her fault she got raped. Good job

  

   No if she were raped than it's not her fault.  However if she was telling ppl there she was 18 and attending college that is showing she's not being truthful in her statements accusing the players of rape.  She claims she told Arsiza she a HS student then he gave her a drink which she suggests contained other intoxicants. Insinuating date rape type drugs. If those were used there would be detectable traces of it in blood analysis I'd imagine.

[ddaryl]

1 minute ago, damj said:

If it's confirmed he admitted to sex on the pretext call, then that's statuatory rape and he should be cut. Let the legal system play out for guilt or innocence on the rape charges

 

and if she told him he was 18... how can someone be guilty of that if they were lied to.

Do we need a federal law that says the following paperwork much be submitted before any sexual intercourse ???

Lying should be met with equal consequences.... Going to a college party and posing as a college student is not ok.

Phyiscal rape, if guilty it don't matter the age, but statutory rape that was found after the fact based on false pretenses... come on.

[4merper4mer]

4 minutes ago, StHustle said:

not taking his side but I’ve actually found most women prefer rough sex (didn’t learn this until in my 30s) but not to the extent of bruising and bleeding. But I have witnessed (the aftermath) multiple times in my life where consensual rough sex resulted in bruising. I would leave it up to a female poster to say if they’ve experienced vaginal bleeding from rough sex.

 

With all that said…there is a good chance she was raped that night…the question is who the culprit(s) was/were. Things can get awfully crazy at college parties. Once a girl I had sex with at a party…woke up next morning to find her in bed with my buddy. Totally consensual but was a wake up call for me in many ways. I’ll leave it at that.

 

 

Dude.  Please attach a filter of some sort.  Nobody needs to read your thoughts on women’s preferences and I’m pretty sure your request for information from female posters will go unanswered.

[SirAndrew]

1 minute ago, UKBillFan said:

Rape convictions are at a historical low, in the U.K. at least. I think most people leave it up to the legal system to decide whether someone is innocent or guilty.

I agree, we have no other way to judge these things. I’m just saying the legal system isn’t always spot on. There’s a ton of variables required to prosecute someone, including the police end of it. I think we get it right more often than not, but just because someone isn’t in jail, doesn’t mean they didn’t commit a crime. That doesn’t mean their life should necessarily being ruined, it’s just strange when people act like it’s a sure thing nothing happened just because someone isn’t in jail. 

[ExiledInIllinois]

3 minutes ago, Logic said:

109 pages in 17 hours. Gotta be a TSW record.

This one's going to be hard to ever definitively prove one way or the other, as rape accusations of this nature often are.

The question, then, is do the Bills want to stand by Araiza, weather the firestorm of criticism and distraction and the hit to their reputation? Or, instead, do they figure that a punter isn't worth the headaches this matter is about to cause?

Even if one removes moral and ethical implications and looks at the matter strictly from a cynical, practical point of view, it seems to me that a rookie punter is NOT worth the headaches this matter is about to cause. Further, I would say that who is punting for the Bills will likely have very little impact on their Super Bowl chances over the next five years.

Cut him, sign a mediocre, boring veteran, and move on. Set a precedent. Be better than the Browns and the Commanders of the world. Be better.

IMO, this punter is worth the headaches even if Baltimore and Tampa didn't think so. Probably why he fell to #180, 3 out of 4 punters taken. ???

 

Play it out till he's either out of the mess or he'll never play again. I am not worried about the media distraction.  Life throws lemons, make lemonade.

[UKBillFan]

6 minutes ago, Logic said:

109 pages in 17 hours. Gotta be a TSW record.

This one's going to be hard to ever definitively prove one way or the other, as rape accusations of this nature often are.

The question, then, is do the Bills want to stand by Araiza, weather the firestorm of criticism and distraction and the hit to their reputation? Or, instead, do they figure that a punter isn't worth the headaches this matter is about to cause?

Even if one removes moral and ethical implications and looks at the matter strictly from a cynical, practical point of view, it seems to me that a rookie punter is NOT worth the headaches this matter is about to cause. Further, I would say that who is punting for the Bills will likely have very little impact on their Super Bowl chances over the next five years.

Cut him, sign a mediocre, boring veteran, and move on. Set a precedent. Be better than the Browns and the Commanders of the world. Be better.

Be better than the Browns or Commanders - by axing someone because of the position in the team as much as what he has allegedly done.

[Beck Water]

7 hours ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

I guess we can just debunk #3:

 

https://www.liveabout.com/ranking-golfs-greatest-players-1561114

 

Nope, Debunk Fail.  🚨  Your article is using "male" as an adjective - "male golfer". 

The issue here is using "female" or "male" as a noun, as in "You know what females are like in those situations"

Female what?  Female kangaroos?  Female referees?  Female tennis players?  Female humans?  Oh wait there's a word for that.

 

Your article, after using "male" as an adjective to modify the noun "golfer", goes on to refer to them as "men".

 

Read more carefully and Better Luck Next Time.

[1ManRaid]

10 minutes ago, AuntieEm said:

 

 

   It should also show up in her blood analysis from the rape kit if she had any such drug in her system.  If the rape kit comes back with no DNA matches with any of the 3 players she named then that also would be a bit curious as if she were raped and I would not expect the men to be careful enough to avoid DNA transfers.  If Araiza' s DNA isn't found then it is possible he was not involved in any way but the accusations don't look very good so I truly hope this case has DNA evidence that can absolute confirm Araiza had sex with the girl then  I also hope there's enough evidence to get a conviction or at least a plea deal so if guilty they do face the punishments.  I don't care s fig about Araizas football skills or if he loses his dream job playing in the NFL if he is guilty of these actions.  Positive DNA would at the very least have him guilty of statutory rape.  He was old enough to make correct choices about having sex with a young woman he didn't know and just met.

 

He should be suspended pending the results of the criminal investigation then based on the results he should be punished or not by the NFL based on the results.  

 

So, I wsnt justice that will punishment whomever is the guilty party in this situation.  If the victim was raped and the DNA can prove which men had sex with he they get to live in prison until their sentence is completed. If she is lying and just trying to make a money grab I would love it if facts and evidence proving that would surface in the investigation.  

 

  This issue becomes a big old PR mess if there no physical supporting evidence and stays as a he said/she said type situation.  And it's because thee issue is an important one.  There are valid arguments on both sides of every story and whatever the facts show to be the correct result of these charges.  If he is not charged criminally I do hope it is with clear evidence he was not involved in anyway.  Otherwise it still leaves a stain on Araiza which would be unfair if he truly is just being targeted  for an extortion attempt then I also hope that evidence proves that to be what happened and that the false accusations result in jail time on whatever charges exist for bringing false charges etc.

 

 

 

 

The alleged incident happened in college, and I'm told outside the jurisdiction of what the NFL can act on.  They can't suspend him for alleged conduct that occurred before he was ever an employee of theirs or subject to their CBA.

 

As for the statutory rape charge, as much as people want it to be, it's not that black and white.  Sure it is irresponsible of him to be sleeping with random girls, but "she lied about her age" IS a defense in California.  I am no making no claims about which one is lying (only that ONE of them is, or is at least mistaken), but it is entirely possible he honestly believed she was of legal age and that she is lying to not look bad, or even to ruin his life for whatever reason or get a payout.  Girls who go to parties and get underage drunk and have sex with random men are also the type to carry false IDs, so we don't know.  There's also been numerous high profile false rape claims against student athletes.  Again, none of this is to say she's lying, but in my opinion more than sufficiently qualifies as a situation to hold off on the lynching until the facts come out.

[Mango]

Total speculation here. 

I think the Bills thought 2 things: 

1. Araiza would have settled to not be named in the civil suit. 

2. They had assurance from SDPD that they would be protecting Araiza (10 months without the results of a rape kit? Come on). The Bills aren't caught off guard from the events. They're caught off guard that this Araiza's camp didn't make this go away. 

 

None of this has anything to do with the franchises belief that Araiza was guilty or innocent. And everything to do with this never coming a distraction. 

[UKBillFan]

1 minute ago, SirAndrew said:

I agree, we have no other way to judge these things. I’m just saying the legal system isn’t always spot on. There’s a ton of variables required to prosecute someone, including the police end of it. I think we get it right more often than not, but just because someone isn’t in jail, doesn’t mean they didn’t commit a crime. That doesn’t mean their life should necessarily being ruined, it’s just strange when people act like it’s a sure thing nothing happened just because someone isn’t in jail. 

Because that’s all we can go on. Otherwise we would be under mob rule where people with pitchforks who is guilty and innocent with perhaps very little evidence to prove it.

[OutOfBubbleGum]

I'm sure all of the Karen's out there will want blood. What would ex Gov Cuomo say about this?

[Heitz]

8 minutes ago, BTB said:

https://twitter.com/bytimgraham/status/1563135906717917184?s=21&t=rcs5Lxx7QJ1w0ixg8hFyMA

 

But what about the two tweets after that one...

 

@ByTimGraham

But the attorney also says he was hired just six weeks ago, and my sources from multiple teams don't agree the NFL was aware.

 

@ByTimGraham

That said, there could be semantics in play. Is he saying Araiza's camp informed the league office (which then didn't inform all the teams)? Did they inform only teams that interviewed him (Bills met with him at combine at least)? Is someone lying (probably)

 

 

Kind of a big caveat...

[Logic]

1 minute ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

IMO, this punter is worth the headaches even if Baltimore and Tampa didn't think so. Probably why he fell to #180, 3 out of 4 punters taken. ???

 

Play it out till he's either out of the mess or he'll never play again. I am not worried about the media distraction.  Life throws lemons, make lemonade.

Gross. The accusations against Araiza are truly vile.

"He kicks the ball real far!" is not justification for rostering a player who potentially violently raped a woman for 90 minutes.

Prioritizing a handful of extra special teams yards in a football game over the health of a victimized human being and the LAW...is really gross. Don't know any other way to say it.

[dje85]

Just now, Wayne Arnold said:

 

It's not as if Araiza blew Haack away. It was close in camp. Haack is a seasoned vet, was immediately picked up after getting cut. I don't see how any guy off the street is as good or better than him.

We are talking about practice / training camp. Everyone and their mother were  calling for his head all last year because he was bad. An okay training camp doesn't change the fact he ranked 22nd or worse in all punting statistics last year and helped cause us one or more lost games last year.  

PUNTS

22nd

PUNT GROSS AVG.

31st

LONG

22nd

PINNED INSIDE THE 20

24th

 

 

[CSBill]

12 minutes ago, Logic said:

109 pages in 17 hours. Gotta be a TSW record.

This one's going to be hard to ever definitively prove one way or the other, as rape accusations of this nature often are.

The question, then, is do the Bills want to stand by Araiza, weather the firestorm of criticism and distraction and the hit to their reputation? Or, instead, do they figure that a punter isn't worth the headaches this matter is about to cause?

Even if one removes moral and ethical implications and looks at the matter strictly from a cynical, practical point of view, it seems to me that a rookie punter is NOT worth the headaches this matter is about to cause. Further, I would say that who is punting for the Bills will likely have very little impact on their Super Bowl chances over the next five years.

Cut him, sign a mediocre, boring veteran, and move on. Set a precedent. Be better than the Browns and the Commanders of the world. Be better.

 

While emotionally I do not want to agree with you, my logical brain says yes. No punter is worth the potential level of distraction this could be--even if he is proven innocent (but that will take time, and time is not his or the Bills ally right now).

 

 

Edited August 26, 2022 by CSBill

[ddaryl]

2 minutes ago, UKBillFan said:

Because that’s all we can go on. Otherwise we would be under mob rule where people with pitchforks who is guilty and innocent with perhaps very little evidence to prove it.

Witch burnings, midievel stonings... innocent till proven guilty is here based off those past atrocities

[zow2]

Araiza is now on trial by the social media world and Buffalo/National media.

This is not a spot he wants to be in.  There’s really no way he comes out of this with an NFL career in the short term.

[BuffaloRebound]

Bills must’ve really been done with Haack.  Or they are confident there’s no merit to the lawsuit.  

[damj]

7 minutes ago, ddaryl said:

 

and if she told him he was 18... how can someone be guilty of that if they were lied to.

Do we need a federal law that says the following paperwork much be submitted before any sexual intercourse ???

Lying should be met with equal consequences.... Going to a college party and posing as a college student is not ok.

Phyiscal rape, if guilty it don't matter the age, but statutory rape that was found after the fact based on false pretenses... come on.

Fair point.

 

Still, will the distraction week in and week out be worth it?

[Wayne Arnold]

5 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

And they should also have a web site up with free access to Kim Pegula’s medical records right?  
 

12 hours of silence is deafening?  12 hours?  Consider that anything they say or do has potential impact on whether they could be party to a civil suit and at what level…..or at least they have to protect against that.  The lawyers for both parties here are clearly loose cannons.  There is no need for the Bills to turn into a third one.

 

Are people outraged and threatening to boycott the Bills over Kim's medical records? Of course not. Weird comparison.

 

If you're a professional sports franchise willing to keep an accused rapist, you'd better be ready to explain why. Otherwise you look dumb at best.

[Motorin']

11 minutes ago, BTB said:

https://twitter.com/bytimgraham/status/1563135906717917184?s=21&t=rcs5Lxx7QJ1w0ixg8hFyMA

 

In slimy lawyer talk, "you better believe he did" could be defined as "I hope you believe that he did." Not an affirmation that he actually did. 

 

So what exactly did he tell the NFL, and what exactly did the Bills know at the time of the draft?