Matt Araiza accused of rape, served with a lawsuit.

[Alphadawg7]

Just now, Simon said:

 

The title should say that the investigation didn't include the victim's lawyer.

Judging by what we've seen from teh guy, I doubt if I would have contacted him in a fact-finding mission either.

 

 

 

Seriously and spot on.  Also...This dude has a pattern of trying to win cases on twitter, just go look at his posts on all his cases.  

Does not mean this woman is lying, just means this article is incredibly stupid and terrible journalism.

[Beck Water]

Just now, Simon said:

 

The title should say that the investigation didn't include the victim's lawyer.

Judging by what we've seen from teh guy, I doubt if I would have contacted him in a fact-finding mission either.

 

 

 

I can't keep up with this thread (and frankly, don't want to) but one thing I don't understand is the apparent concern over the alleged victim's lawyer saying "the Bills never reached out to me or contacted my client"

 

As I understand it, his client is potentially a witness and the victim in a potential criminal case which is still under active consideration by the DA.  Would it not potentially constitute "witness tampering" for someone closely associated with Araiza to talk to her?

 

And yeah, no, I wouldn't contact the victim's lawyer on a fact-finding mission.

[Behindenemylines]

15 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I presume we are going for every 4th down then? 

 

On a serious note I am not against the Bills holding him out until there is some resolution. Ideally the Commissioner would put him on the exempt list. But he didn't do that for Watson so not holding my breath.

Because the issue happened prior to him joining the league I believe the commissioner has not jurisdiction so to speak.  The Bills however do as his employer. 

[BillsShredder83]

1 hour ago, DC Tom said:

Take your outrage and make it mean something.

 

 

What?!?! Weird with the 19 part considering the circumstances and I'm from the wait and see clan.

 

"Donate 4 dollars today to a sexual assault foundation in Cleveland in honor of Watsons accusers" would be almost equally weird 

 

 

[Alphadawg7]

2 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

Maybe Jane Doe doesn't even exist? Maybe there was never even a crime at all and all of this is just an AI simulation on twitter?

I'm 100% willing to be wrong in saying that he was on the property at the time as opposed to sticking my neck out for a potential rapist, but you do you my man.

 

Show me anywhere I stook my neck out for anyone.  Seriously, show me one time I said he is innocent.  I said we need to wait until more is known before we decide his guilt or innocence.  I cant believe how difficult it is for you to understand that.

[1ManRaid]

6 minutes ago, fridge said:

There are two separate things at play here:

 

1. How the Buffalo Bills, a football team, should handle this

2. The legal implications (both criminal and civil) that Matt, the person, faces.

 

#1 should be easy. Cut him. Will there be a wrongful termination lawsuit if he's innocent? Sure. Cost of doing business for a billionaire with a football team. A punter's potential lifetime salary that they would be suing for isn't going to cripple the organization.

 

#2 is more complicated.  So far the lawyers have done a horrible job discussing the case with the media. It also is completely irrelevant to how the team should handle this. If you believe that the kid deserves his day in court, you can still accept that the team should release him to avoid the problems.

 

 

I take MASSIVE ethical/moral issues with your #1.  It should not be so easy to turn someone's life upside down on a whim, just because you can afford the consequences without regard to the human life you are destroying.  Only highly paid QBs and the like deserve fundamental rights and respect now?

[nkreed]

4 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

Araiza attorney said the Bills used a private investigator 

John Wawrow's article explains why this was escalated:

 

Gilleon said the decision to file the lawsuit three days after Araiza was awarded the punting job was the result of his growing frustration over the lack of feedback he was receiving from police on the progress of their investigation.

 

“They’re just blowing us off,” Gilleon said. “By filing a lawsuit, we have the power of subpoena and so I can force them to do what they’re supposed to do.”

 

Back last night I predicted this was to get the DA to do their job/influence their decision in bringing up criminal charges.

 

 

[Aussie Joe]

8 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

It's possible.

 

Apparently there may be quite the campaign of season ticket holders weighing in:

 

 

 

I mean, this broke right about the time they were probably at the airport, right? 

 

So the Bills were "behind the curve", they had to decide

-if there was new information beyond what they already knew about

-if that new information materially affected the team's decision about Araiza

-what was the public impact on the team (PR, ticket sales)

-what was the viewpoint of the owners Kim and Terry Pegula?

-any input or guidance from the league

 

It's not a surprise that he might travel with the team to the game, and then have whatever next steps they want to take get sorted.

He couldn’t have remained at the hotel?

[Beck Water]

5 minutes ago, Bills2022 said:

 

He is a good punter and holder. No joke. You will be surprised how good he is. 

 

Well, I would certainly welcome any pleasant surprise!

[Taro Nimbus]

just out of curiosity, will this post have the record for most pages?

[Solomon Grundy]

Could the Bills put him on some type of suspension from team until this is resolved? 

[Airseven]

4 minutes ago, Shake_My_Head said:

That headline seems designed to generate clicks and cast aspersions on the Bills.    Why would they ever talk to the plaintiff's lawyer?   

 

Talk to law enforcement, talk to private investigators.   Just like in the McCoy case that's been cited a few times in this thread...

 

He's quick to condemn to get pats on the back from his moral media brethren. You don't even need to read the article after seeing the headline. Did Mina Kimes chime in this afternoon? 

[BullBuchanan]

1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Show me anywhere I stook my neck out for anyone.  Seriously, show me one time I said he is innocent.  I said we need to wait until more is known before we decide his guilt or innocence.  I cant believe how difficult it is for you to understand that.

Oh, it's not difficult for me to understand, it's just not what you're doing. Your show is getting old.

[Bills2022]

1 minute ago, McDeerInTheHeadlights said:

 

I can appreciate your viewpoint, but that's what it was worth to the eggheads of our franchise. They should have a pretty clear idea of what's needed to them, don't you think?

 

I think they picked him based on value, not need. You can't really evaluate the Bills punter based on net. They move the ball down the field so much.  Just my opinion.

[fridge]

Just now, 1ManRaid said:

 

 

I take MASSIVE ethical/moral issues with your #1.  It should not be so easy to turn someone's life upside down on a whim, just because you can afford the consequences without regard to the human life you are destroying.  Only highly paid QBs and the like deserve fundamental rights and respect now?

 

Hey man, I get it. It's annoying. HOWEVER -- there's a difference between a baseless accusation and one that has legs.

 

If this were a baseless wild claim, then sure. You don't get to just ruin a man's life without evidence. That's not exactly the case here. I do agree that there is some skepticism in the way that Doe's lawyer has been handling this with the media.

 

This is why I think it's wildly important to separate #1 and #2 in my post. As a football team, given the circumstance, this is a fairly simple solution that works on several levels. It's not setting a precedent. It's just solving a problem that has risen.

[The Wiz]

4 minutes ago, Taro Nimbus said:

just out of curiosity, will this post have the record for most pages?

Probably. 

[Turk71]

So the Bills 'thorough' investigation made no contact with and had no input from the victim or her attorney whatsoever, that's a thorough investigation? wtf

 

[Captain Caveman]

22 minutes ago, Success said:

It's like Duke Lacrosse never happened.

 

The thing is, for every story similar to Duke Lacrosse there are 10 more women who are raped / sexually assaulted where the offenders are not held accountable.  

[BillsFanSD]

Just now, fridge said:

 

Hey man, I get it. It's annoying. HOWEVER -- there's a difference between a baseless accusation and one that has legs.

 

If this were a baseless wild claim, then sure. You don't get to just ruin a man's life without evidence. That's not exactly the case here. I do agree that there is some skepticism in the way that Doe's lawyer has been handling this with the media.

 

This is why I think it's wildly important to separate #1 and #2 in my post. As a football team, given the circumstance, this is a fairly simple solution that works on several levels. It's not setting a precedent. It's just solving a problem that has risen.

At this point, though, the accusation is baseless.  Or at least it's baseless from our point of view.

 

Jane Doe had friends at the party in question who can back up her claim or undermine it.  The police have probably talked with those people.  Both sets of attorneys definitely have.  The Bills almost certainly have.  Everybody connected to this case knows what those young women will testify to.  We don't.  What possible reason could any of us have for not wanting to wait to hear what they have to say?

 

If Jane Doe's friends agree that Araiza was there and he led Doe back to the room where she was attacked as she described, then this is an easy call -- cut him and be done with it.  But why make that call now when we know there are people sitting right there who can provide valuable information one way or the other?

[Buffalo_Stampede]