Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Mango said:

 

 

The civil suit is to push the DA to make a decision on charges. There seems to be zero people involved who say that a rape did not happen. The girl was 100% raped. The police have 100% stalled efforts to protect SDSU football. 

Whether Araiza is involved in being in the room is currently debatable. 

If the police had not stalled, I don't think that the Bills are dealing with Araiza in a civil suit at the moment. That has nothing to do with his guilt or innocence.

 

Mango, I'm 100% not sure the bolded is true.  After an initial wait, the police seem to have taken the young woman's claims seriously and to put some investigative effort into her case.

 

I know that it can take months just to process samples through a crime lab, and some people here who say they are involved with SVU investigations say that 8-10 months to put all the evidence together and forward it to the DA for a decision on charges is not uncommon.  The victim acknowledges being intoxicated when she arrived, and to have been blacking out during the rape with no clear memories of what happened (for example, when the TV station showed the picture of bruises around her neck, they said she was asked if those marks were from strangulation and her response was she couldn't remember). 

 

That kind of case is notoriously difficult to prosecute, so the DA would understandably want to take his or her time and review what is probably a thick packet of evidence thoroughly.

 

I do agree that one goal here is probably to push the DA's office and the university to act, but I'm not sure they're "stalled" as a matter of "protecting SDSU football".

Edited by Beck Water
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, cle23 said:

 

Yes, those things can happen during consensual sex, but rarely do women then tell everyone it was rape, and go to the hospital for a rape kit just for the fun of it.  

I’m not saying one way or the other until all facts come to light. There are instances where people will actually do that. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, ColoradoBills said:

I haven't read much of this thread since last night but I did see this on the Channel 8 TV site.

Not sure if it has been posted.  Seems the police have a lot of stuff that they went through.

 

 

local CBS affiliate. Yep. I hadn't seen this posted mate.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, dje85 said:

 

This could be why the Bills aren't just canning him like many want them to as well. 

If he isn;t subject tot he leagues personal policy conduct and then was cut just because of this the Bills and NFL could have a major lawsuit on their hands in regards from Araiza imo.

NFL is employment at will, you can be cut for any reason. 

  • Disagree 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, aceman_16 said:

I sorry you feel this way. Your posts in this thread read as if you have some axe to grind or some sort of agenda. It may be good for some of us to just put access to this subject away for a day and see how the thoughts to social media changes. Good luck and stay healthy.

 

My axe to grind is that there are zero people who are disputing whether this girl was gang raped for 90 minutes and a player on the Bills is involved at any level. At the baseline of facts that everybody agrees on, Matt Araiza had sex with a girl that was so drunk he needed to go help her lay down.

My axe to grind is that there are 121 pages of old men who don't believe (respect) women.


There is no agenda. And your insinuation that such a stance of believing women and not wanting that trash in my town or on my football team is disgusting. 

  • Eyeroll 3
  • Sad 1
  • Disagree 3
  • Agree 1
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Mango said:

 

My axe to grind is that there are zero people who are disputing whether this girl was gang raped for 90 minutes and a player on the Bills is involved at any level. At the baseline of facts that everybody agrees on, Matt Araiza had sex with a girl that was so drunk he needed to go help her lay down.

My axe to grind is that there are 121 pages of old men who don't believe (respect) women.


There is no agenda. And your insinuation that such a stance of believing women and not wanting that trash in my town or on my football team is disgusting. 


I don’t think there is complete agreement that she wanted to lie down because she was drunk. If she was, then if it goes to court, the question will be put as intoxicated or incapacitated.

 

ETA - Until defendants are found guilty in court, it is a case of innocent until proven guilty, and therefore is alleged.

Edited by UKBillFan
Added a comment
  • Agree 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

I haven't read much of this thread since last night but I did see this on the Channel 8 TV site.

Not sure if it has been posted.  Seems the police have a lot of stuff that they went through.

 

 

 

Thanks for sharing.

 

The fact that charges seem imminent doesn't seem to bode well for Araiza.


But if I were the Bills, I'd wait to see how much of the evidence I could review.  

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, CountDorkula said:

NFL is employment at will, you can be cut for any reason. 

No, it's not and no you can't.  Players are union members and their employment is subject to a collective bargaining agreement.  They are not "at-will" employees.

  • Agree 3
Posted
6 minutes ago, UKBillFan said:


The consent question is alleged by the prosecution, and countered by the defence. It has not been proven.

 

OK. Lets go down that path. Nobody was in the room. 

Why would he bring her up to an empty room and lay her in a bed alone and then leave to go about his night? 
 

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

🌙 🌚 🌔 🌕 🌖 🌛  😜 

 

We have touchdown! You're about 1/2 behind in this Tolstoy novel... 

 

Am I allowed to return to the ShoutBox without pissing off the moody ones? 

 

😉


 

You do know that my current job IS

putting men [edit] and women [/edit] back on the moon 🌝

right?


I don’t have time to read 100 pages 

 

the BIG NASA 🚀 launch coming up is just One of many steps in the process 


 

Edited by SlimShady'sSpaceForce
  • Haha (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, Mango said:

 

 

The civil suit is to push the DA to make a decision on charges. There seems to be zero people involved who say that a rape did not happen. The girl was 100% raped. The police have 100% stalled efforts to protect SDSU football. 

Whether Araiza is involved in being in the room is currently debatable. 

If the police had not stalled, I don't think that the Bills are dealing with Araiza in a civil suit at the moment. That has nothing to do with his guilt or innocence.

 

Yeah I think it is highly likely she was raped.  But I also think it's entirely possible she's misremembering things and her brain is falsely tying him to the rape in a desperate bid to make sense of a traumatic and chaotic thing that happened to her.  She so clearly remembers having sex with him, but then details only get fuzzy after so she wasn't roofied (if she was) until after his involvement.  Again, it's also possible he WAS involved in the rape, but from what I'm seeing there isn't any evidence of that yet.  Would be really strange for him to roofie her only AFTER having sex with her, that's like begging to be caught because her sex with you would be the one thing she's most likely to remember.

  • Agree 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, mannc said:

No, it's not and no you can't.  Players are union members and their employment is subject to a collective bargaining agreement.  They are not "at-will" employees.

a team can cut a player for any reason. 

  • Disagree 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

He’s specifically singling out araiza only as well… when he’s not the only one named 

Because he allegedly orchestrated the whole thing and is the primary suspect.

Posted
23 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

 

We can also have him place on the exempt list until this whole thing gets sorted out and cut him after that. 

 

So does exempt list count towards 53 man roster and salary cap?

Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Mango said:

 

I agree. I think at the very best Araiza is a dirt bag and I don't want him on the roster. Even if he wasn't in that room, and he brought her up their not knowing anybody else would sleep with her. He still had sex with a girl who was so drunk she couldn't actually consent and he knew it by bringing her someplace to sleep it off after the fact.

I had another post above this where I thought the police's attempts to protect SDSU are the biggest reason we are in this predicament and you summarized that perfectly. 

You appear to be basing this extreme opinion--kick this guy off the Bills' roster before there's any sort of adjudication or, to our knowledge a thorough investigation--on what's been said by a plaintiff's lawyer and what's been alleged in the plaintiff's complaint.  I don't think that's prudent.  If I'm wrong about that, tell me what else you're basing your opinion on. 

Edited by mannc
Posted

I don't know what's true or not, but I can say that I won't feel bad for Araiza if he's cut ASAP.  

 

If there's even a chance he did what he's being accused of, then I hope charges are brought forward. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, Mango said:

 

OK. Lets go down that path. Nobody was in the room. 

Why would he bring her up to an empty room and lay her in a bed alone and then leave to go about his night? 
 


I don’t know - I think the defence is she asked to lie down so he took her to a room to do so then left. It may be more in depth in the official statements which have not been released.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...