McDermott/Beane press conference 8/27: Matt Araiza released

[JimmyNoodles]

14 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

This is a great point and I was wondering when it would be made (I haven't bothered going into the 272+ pages in the other topic).

 

Someone is going to take the fall. It will be a test of the Buffalo Bills organization to see what the fallout will be from this situation and how much damage it might cause internally.

 

 

Good overall take on a fairly complex subject.

 

My thought is that most people here seem to think the Bills either handled this very well or very poorly.

 

But again the truth doesn't always fit into a nice, tidy binary box.

 

The Bills did some things well and other things poorly. You could probably assign them a numerical grade. I dock them points for not doing better on the due diligence/vetting of Araiza. I also dock them points for not continuing the engagement between De'Angelo and Gilleon. They had nothing to lose and possibly something to gain by staying connected in this conversation... even if it's just for good optics. The Bills have not been flawless in this situation but I think overall they responded pretty well. 

My take was the statement that they had done a thorough investigation was the big misstep. I think they were fine waiting on possible charges. They can’t predict what other people are going to do or determine the veracity of accusations. As for getting a call from the looney-tune lawyer, how are they supposed to judge that. The guy still makes no sense. I do think it’s telling that no criminal charges have been filed to date. It doesn’t appear to be an open and shut case as much as her lawyer would pretend it is. 

[Augie]

1 hour ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

They're Rams fans.  

 

Well, then they should be on to the next thing soon……

[UKBillFan]

Just now, JimmyNoodles said:

My take was the statement that they had done a thorough investigation was the big misstep. I think they were fine waiting on possible charges. They can’t predict what other people are going to do or determine the veracity of accusations. As for getting a call from the looney-tune lawyer, how are they supposed to judge that. The guy still makes no sense. I do think it’s telling that no criminal charges have been filed to date. It doesn’t appear to be an open and shut case as much as her lawyer would pretend it is. 

 

Yes, if they had said 'continuing' investigation or that they were taking stock of ongoing events which would shape future decisions then it would have bought them a lot more time.

[HalftimeAdjustment]

16 hours ago, SCBills said:

This lawyer is a vile, pathetic human being and the last part of the statement makes absolutely no sense. 

 

That really is a disjointed mess of a statement. IF Matt Araiza did what is alleged in the complaint then he would not be able to get off with an apology. That statement tends to indicate the lawyer knows the police are not going to prosecute Araiza.

[oldmanfan]

11 minutes ago, JimmyNoodles said:

My take was the statement that they had done a thorough investigation was the big misstep. I think they were fine waiting on possible charges. They can’t predict what other people are going to do or determine the veracity of accusations. As for getting a call from the looney-tune lawyer, how are they supposed to judge that. The guy still makes no sense. I do think it’s telling that no criminal charges have been filed to date. It doesn’t appear to be an open and shut case as much as her lawyer would pretend it is. 

Thorough was a terrible choice of wording.

[jkeerie]

You know...everyone that wants to hang people out to dry on this and want to throw rocks at the organization are presuming all this information was readily available weeks and weeks ago.  The Bills were trying to piece things together based on very limited information.  Likely they put everything in the hands of their attorney who would best know how to navigate the legalities of the situation.  No one knows what the Plaintiff's attorney was willing to say or not say when contacted by the Bill's attorney.  I'm not a lawyer, but I would presume that an attorney would want to hold their cards close to the vest until after they file their civil suit.  That way, things can't be discredited in advance of the filing.  (Quite frankly, I'm still wondering why the plaintiff's attorney even contacted the Bills to begin with.  What was the point?)  So...until the filing of the civil suit, all you did have were allegations by a victim.  Yes, what was released in the press indicates something violent happened, but it doesn't prove who did it.  It alleges who did it.  So...the Bills waited to take any action against Araiza until they learned of the specifics when they read the 11 page complaint.  Once they did, they took the appropriate action and, to my mind, answered all the questions they needed to answer.  It's done.  Over. The Bills are moving on, and so should we (despite the local media hacks wanting to continue to cast aspersions).

 

And speaking of Haack (see what I did there?), Beane so much as admitted that was likely a mistake in judgment.  I think they will be fine, though.  There are good, capable punters out there with experience holding the football and they will find one.  

 

The criticism aimed at McD for calling Matt "a good kid" is ridiculous.  The team member he knew at the time he made those comments was to him "a good kid."  We as fans  likely thought the same.  Until the revelation and the suit.  Now...?????   So...c'mon man...

 

 

Edited August 28, 2022 by jkeerie

[JimmyNoodles]

7 minutes ago, HalftimeAdjustment said:

 

That really is a disjointed mess of a statement. IF Matt Araiza did what is alleged in the complaint then he would not be able to get off with an apology. That statement tends to indicate the lawyer knows the police are not going to prosecute Araiza.

And if that is correct that her lawyer suspected no criminal charges were coming maybe the Bills were under the same impression, hence the problematic “thorough” comment. 

[UKBillFan]

2 minutes ago, jkeerie said:

You know...everyone that wants to hang people out to dry on this and want to throw rocks at the organization are presuming all this information was readily available weeks and weeks ago.  The Bills were trying to piece things together based on very limited information.  Likely they put everything in the hands of their attorney who would best know how to navigate the legalities of the situation.  No one knows what the Plaintiff's attorney was willing to say or not say when contacted by the Bill's attorney.  I'm not a lawyer, but I would presume that an attorney would want to hold their cards close to the vest until after they file their civil suit.  That way, things can't be discredited in advance of the filing.  (Quite frankly, I'm still wondering why the plaintiff's attorney even contacted the Bills to begin with.  What was the point?)  So...until the filing of the civil suit, all you did have were allegations by a victim.  Yes, what was released in the press indicates something violent happened, but it doesn't prove who did it.  It alleges who did it.  So...the Bills waited to take any action against Araiza until they learned of the specifics when they read the 11 page complaint.  Once they did, they took the appropriate action and, to my mind, answered all the questions they needed to answer.  It's done.  Over. The Bills are moving on, and so should we (despite the local media hacks wanting to continue to cast aspersions).

 

And speaking of Haack (see what I did there?), Beane so much as admitted that was likely a mistake in judgment.  I think they will be fine, though.  There are good, capable punters out there with experience holding the football and they will find one.  

 

 

 

And that's why they made the move they did; they did not rate Haack and wanted to move on. But Beane could hardly turn around and say "We were happy to release Haack despite the other guy in his slot being implicated in a gang rape"

[Beck Water]

1 hour ago, Dr.Sack said:

The plaintiffs attorney comment yesterday on the Bills “putting their heads in the sand” is weird. Instead of using the news of Araiza’s release as evidence in his favor public opinion, he took a low blow at a standup Org. Meanwhile SDSU and local LE likely helped cover up the allegation. Misplaced anger is real. 

 

Personally I think that guy has an ego that would fill SoFi stadium capacity all by itself, with room left for Matt Stafford but not Matt Stafford's helmet

 

This may sound victim-blaming and I'm sorry if so, that's not how it's intended. When a guy's client brings the police "I can barely even remember" "what the hell did they do to me in there?" "my neck is disgusting, I don't know if they are hickies or bruises" "not really sure what happened next"  "I don't remember" "everything else is very hazy" "I don't think I was even awake", it is absolutely not her fault that rapists raped her, but from a law enforcement and prosecution point of view, she's handing them a steep uphill climb to build a case that will sustain charges.

[UKBillFan]

9 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Personally I think that guy has an ego that would fill SoFi stadium capacity all by itself, with room left for Matt Stafford but not Matt Stafford's helmet

 

This may sound victim-blaming and I'm sorry if so, that's not how it's intended. When a guy's client brings the police "I can barely even remember" "what the hell did they do to me in there?" "my neck is disgusting, I don't know if they are hickies or bruises" "not really sure what happened next"  "I don't remember" "everything else is very hazy" "I don't think I was even awake", it is absolutely not her fault that rapists raped her, but from a law enforcement and prosecution point of view, she's handing them a steep uphill climb to build a case that will sustain charges.

 

Not so sure - surely that suggests she was incapcitated which implies she could not give consent? Though they'll have to rely on witnesses and the rape kit to get to the bottom of what happened.

 

And that could be why the alleged victim's attorney actions are suggesting that Araiza is not to be issued criminal charges. If both parties agree they had consensual sex earlier in the evening, and there are no witnesses placing him in the room (which is what the defence attorney claims) then they would possibly struggle to acquire enough evidence to charge.

 

I will add that the DA office obviously has all the evidence, and the above is piecing social media comments with the excellent post from an attorney made yesterday on here, breaking down the case. So I may be well off.

[What a Tuel]

42 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Thorough was a terrible choice of wording.

 

No it wasnt. It can be thorough, find everything they could have access to, and still not have all the facts. 

 

The media and your comments are trying to make a fiasco out of probably the best handling this could have been done short of knowing about it predraft.

 

Bills org found out about it in July. 

At that point it was just an accusation.

They would not have drafted him if they knew of it before the draft.

They released him 2-3 days after civil charges were filed.

 

What more could they have done? The bills org is not a court. It doesnt have the time, resources, or access to witnesses/evidence to determine what is true here. 

 

Lets just move on. But we won't because the media has stories for ages to write about it to stir things up now.

 

 

Edited August 28, 2022 by What a Tuel

[Tiberius]

9 minutes ago, UKBillFan said:

 

Not so sure - surely that suggests she was incapcitated which implies she could not give consent? Though they'll have to rely on witnesses and the rape kit to get to the bottom of what happened.

 

And that could be why the alleged victim's attorney actions are suggesting that Araiza is not to be issued criminal charges. If both parties agree they had consensual sex earlier in the evening, and there are no witnesses placing him in the room (which is what the defence attorney claims) then they would possibly struggle to acquire enough evidence to charge.

 

I will add that the DA office obviously has all the evidence, and the above is piecing social media comments with the excellent post from an attorney made yesterday on here, breaking down the case. So I may be well off.

In the statement the lawyer claims that Araiza raped her

[Punching Bag]

18 hours ago, Augie said:

 

Who does NOT say it’s not about the money?

 

We’ll probably never know, but why go after the one guy who happened to make an NFL team, right when he made it. I think I’d have gone after SDSU first. Who do you think has deeper pockets?  Hint: It is not a 6th round rookie. I don’t care if the police told them they were handling it, that institution bears some blame if they let this slide.  There is something strange about all this, and none of us know all the facts. Certainly not myself. 

 

Based on words of attorney of claimant calling the Bills an "enabler" and I think for the money pot for legal costs the attorney firm may be going after the Bills.

 

Quote

"The Buffalo Bills had no choice but to cut their young punter after so badly botching their response to our claim: they ignored us, as though what I warned them would happen could be avoided if they just kept their heads in the sand. This is what enablers do. 

 

As typical in cases for companies for which bad publicity can cost a lot they will claim legal costs and try for a settlement.  They will claim legal costs expanded due to Bills inaction and should be liable for it. How much do you think laywers bills be for year and half investigation?

[UKBillFan]

3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

In the statement the lawyer claims that Araiza raped her

 

In the lawsuit for the civil case?

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, UKBillFan said:

 

In the lawsuit for the civil case?

In the statement following his release 

 

https://buffalonews.com/sports/bills/statement-by-jane-doe-attorney-on-bills-release-of-matt-araiza/article_9f0ad892-267b-11ed-92d8-27c54a24b83f.html

[Punching Bag]

1 minute ago, UKBillFan said:

 

In the lawsuit for the civil case?

Starement was in Buffalo News but not the 11 page one filed:

https://buffalonews.com/sports/bills/statement-by-jane-doe-attorney-on-bills-release-of-matt-araiza/article_9f0ad892-267b-11ed-92d8-27c54a24b83f.html#tracking-source=mp-homepage

[UKBillFan]

Just now, Tiberius said:

In the statement following his release 

 

https://buffalonews.com/sports/bills/statement-by-jane-doe-attorney-on-bills-release-of-matt-araiza/article_9f0ad892-267b-11ed-92d8-27c54a24b83f.html

 

But we know that? That has been the claim all along?

[Punching Bag]

50 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Thorough was a terrible choice of wording.

 

It wasn't based on how attorney tried to make the Bills organization a culprit. 

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, UKBillFan said:

 

But we know that? That has been the claim all along?

That's the accusation, judging from the fact they called him on phone about it, I assume it's been the accusation all along 

[UKBillFan]

Just now, Tiberius said:

That's the accusation, judging from the fact they called him on phone about it, I assume it's been the accusation all along 

 

Yes, if I recall correctly from the lawsuit, the claim is that Arazia and the alleged victim had consensual sex outside and then he took her inside and joined in the gang rape with others.