Alphadawg7

I agree...its sadly the world we live in today with social media and the internet

Oh I don't disagree, I had fully expected Haack to not be on this roster going back to the end of last year. I was just saying, if they had planned on also cutting Matt, it would have already been done. They clearly felt good enough about Matts case at the time they cut Haack to also keep him, praise him publicly, and not bring in any other punters, despite how close to the season we are. But again, all that can change at any moment like I said. Public pressure or new info could sway their stance and they could cut him at any time. My main point was they had 6 weeks to investigate the situation and decide if they felt comfortable with Matts side of the story or not before this story came out.

Yet you still DONT know if he was even on the property at the time the rape happens. Oh those pesky facts...

Another post to PIN. How is this so hard for people with their pitchforks to understand this VERY SIMPLE concept.

Honestly, based on precedent set by discipline against Myles Garrett, its going to be absurd for AD to not get any discipline on the matter in terms of suspension. Just another example of awful consistency league wide on how they handle discipline in the NFL. And I don't even want him suspended, I want to beat him and the Rams at their best week 1.

They publicly praised Matt after they cut Haack though. Clearly that wasn't what happened. And with the season around the corner, they would have already signed another punter as well if they intended on also cutting Matt. Again, they had 6 weeks prior knowledge of this, we are not talking about something that was just sprung on them recently. But hey, this could all change at a moments notice still. If public pressure mounts or new info comes in, they may decide to still make a change before week 1.

No problem...some of us around here have to keep a level head

Literally pin this to the top of this thread. How this is so hard to grasp for some is beyond me.

Exactly, why do posters always want threads closed if they dont like that thread? Like this isn't everyones personal message board, you don't like a thread move on to one you do.

Correct, apparently not known by anyone prior to the draft, schools seems to have sat on the story too. Bills apparently made aware of it around 6 weeks ago. Also, the civil attorney representing here shared texts between him and Matt's attorney that show that her civil attorney had been in contact with the Bills and their attorney at the very least through emails. Bills also released a statement acknowledging they had previously been made aware of it and both conducted their own investigation into the matter but also will offer no further comment on the matter given its ongoing civil case at the moment. So, they knew for over a month before cutting Haack, conducted their own investigation, and clearly felt comfortable enough with what they found to be willing to stick with Matt and cut Haack at that time. Of course, at any moment that can change and they can be made aware of new info that leads them to cut Matt at any time too. But for the time being, they seemingly were comfortable with their findings based on what they knew at the time they cut Haack. Especially for an organization with women in leadership and coaching.

I agree, seems unlikely she has fabricated the assault overall as that part seems very credible and so sad and unfortunate she endured that. However, at the same time she doesn't have to be lying about the attack for Matt to also be innocent of gang rape though. I think the real question is if Matt, who seems to have had a separate encounter earlier in the night, was also a participant in the heinous attack on this woman later in the bedroom with the group of monsters who attacked her. That is where I think the questions truly lie on whether or not she is correctly naming him as one of the assaulters.

Come on man, you honestly are just showing you don't even have all the knowledge of all the limited info that is already actually available.

I am not going to bat for anyone, you cant be this bad at reading. I am stating there is LEGITIMATE questions if he was EVEN IN THE HOUSE at the time of the attack. I am only stating let the investigation run its course and the findings shared before you decided he is a rapist with a 1% chance of conviction.

Yet I did not once victim shame...there you go...those pesky facts again screwing your rant. And your link you keep posting, while factual, true, and sad, is not relevant to what people are saying. So once again, please post your interviews of the witnesses, the facts you found in your investigation, and the timeline of the night corroborated by those findings to show: Matt was even at the house when the rape occurred. You know, to be convicted of rape you need to present and have some participation in the actual rape. There are a lot of eyewitness testimonies, allegedly including her own friend at the party with her, that say Matt was not even at the house when the attack and rape happened. That Matt was present in the room or had any connection to the assault. Her own journal written the day after and continued in the days following, released by her own attorney, literally names no one, gives no indication of who was in the room and repeated says she has no idea who was in there. Until you can at least prove those 2 things, your 1% conviction article is 100% irrelevant. You DO NOT KNOW if Matt was actually involved in the rape. This is not a situation where its clear who the assaulter was, an assault happened, and now you have to prove it in a court of law. There is a massive difference between what we know now and the 1% conviction rate you are rearing too where the assault is valid and the assaulter is known but in a court of law its not what you know, its what you can prove. Here, you dont KNOW yet he was even involved in an assault. All we know is PRIOR to the assault there appears to be a then consensual encounter in a different location, but that does not automatically mean he was also part of the later tragic assault on her by a group of horrible guys.

No one is pretending anything, but you do realize its plausible there was first a consensual encounter with Araiza earlier in the night and then an assault by different people later in the night right? Are you aware there are many eyewitness testimonies, including her own friend with her at the party, that have supposedly stated Matt was not even at the house at the time of the assault? Are you aware in her own journal written the day after the attack and the days following, all released by her own attorney, she repeatedly states she had no idea who was actually in the room assaulting her? Are you aware that Matt, an alleged gang raper, reached out to her about getting tested for an STD? What person rapes someone then cares enough to tell them to got get tested for an STD that is both easy to treat and discover? Are you aware that the Bills have done their own deep dive into this investigation and still felt good enough to stick by a guy who is just a punter, just a rookie, and just a 6th round pick making him easily cuttable? So, its quite a gross exaggeration to sit here and refer to it as "mental gymnastics" to see it as currently inconclusive on whether he is guilty of gang raping her. As far as her motives, I think its clear she was attacked. But its also clear she has no memory of who actually attacked her, again he own words in her own hand writing from her own attorney. She clearly had an encounter with Matt earlier in the night, both sides seem to agree on that. But maybe she is assuming Matt is involved because she can't remember much after him? Maybe she is like **** Matt for having a one night stand and lumped him because she knows he is the only one she can get money out of given his stature in the NFL? There is no mental gymnastics, its all quite plausible she was both attacked and had a separate encounter with Matt. And is either intentionally blurring them so she can get money from Matt, or blurring them because she is making assumptions due to the fact she really can't remember enough. He also might just be guilty of the rape...point is, there are a lot of plausible scenarios here that don't take a lot of mental gymnastics to get on both sides of his guilt or innocence.

So we can all be as enraged as you are about his undeniable guilt...do us a favor... Post the list of the eyewitnesses you interviewed please so we can get as in the know as you are on this case. Release the findings here of your full investigation into the matter, at least share all the notes you lent the police department and the Buffalo Bills when you assisted on the full investigation on this matter. Finally, kindly post the full timeline of all the events as they unfolded that you were able to corroborate as facts through your numerous eyewitness interviews and full investigation into the case. Because until you do that...you don't know jack **** about what happened. You read a story on the internet that doesn't have a fraction of all the facts involved with this situation and decided to judge everyone who didn't do join in on your tantrum to point fingers and say guilty before you had enough information to even form that opinion. And seriously, its not only childish, but totally ignorant and unacceptable for you to come on here and tell people who are willing to WAIT UNTIL ALL THE INFORMATION IS KNOWN before condemning someone that we don't have women in our lives we give a **** about. I assure you I love my wife as much or more than anyone on here I would end someones life if they even attempted to harm her. But I am also not ignorant and don't decide someone else is a monster before I know the actual substance and facts of a case. So respectfully...shut up with the character attacks on the fan base choosing to hear more info before forming an opinion. You don't know any of us or our character. And in this country, despite the internet keyboard culture we live in, you are still innocent until proven guilty. And right now, he doesn't even have chargers against him let alone been proven to a willing participant in a gang rape. It's stances like yours that have led to this out of control cancel culture that is out of control.

This is terrible and so sorry to hear those women went through that. I had a friend who also had a similar experience and it was tough to see her go through that. On the other side, I had one of my closest friends go through a false accusation and it ruined his life for a while despite hard evidence clearing his name. It was an ex who sat out to ruin his life after he broke up with her. We all worked together, she was a psycho and even tried to stab him in the neck with a pencil while they were dating and we were at work. Its always sad on both ends...if you are a victim, what they have to go through to get justice can be maddening, if they ever even get justice. If you are being preyed on and falsely accused, its also a living nightmare and can ruin your life and follow you still even after clearing your name.

Again, you’re assuming he was involved in the sexual assault. You are completely over looking the possibility they had a consensual encounter prior and separately from the assault by the other individuals later in the night.

Again, all good, we agree to disagree. I’m just shocked because the film on Adams is incredible. He has the best release off the line in the NFL and is easily one of the best route runners in the league.

You asked if the SD police denounced it as fake. I countered with have they confirmed his involvement yet? Point being neither has happened, and therefore we need to wait until we know more.

Have they charged Matt or even confirmed he participated in a forceful rape?

Yes I read it, do you even understand what a lawsuit is? I can literally file a lawsuit tomorrow against you for what ever I want…does it make a true? A lawsuit isn’t an indication of confirmed guilt.

I support waiting to know facts and see evidence before handing out a conviction. Obviously a foreign concept to you so much you don’t even understand what that actually means.

OJ went through a trial, you know that thing where they present all the evidence and facts. You read an internet headline.

This statement alone tells me how ignorant you are. Hey tell me something…how many eyewitnesses did you interview? Tell us all about the rest of your vigorous investigation? Have the authorities named you their lead detective yet? Ah wait…nevermind, you read a headline and became an internet Karen keyboard warrior as if you knew everything. Don’t worry, we already know. Rest of us sane, level headed individuals will let the facts come out before we decide someone’s innocent or guilt.