Matt Araiza accused of rape, served with a lawsuit.

[LeGOATski]

6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Agree. And based on what McDermott said last night sounds like that is what happened. Two in hindsight character misevaluations in a week. That has gotta sting for Brandon. 

 

 

Who's the other one?

 

Unrelated: I didn't even realize Dion Dawkins restructured his contract this week. It's been too crazy.

[zow2]

It’s a bad look, obviously,  and they will have to make a move. 

I just don’t want a situation where everyone is rushing to judgement and then 2 months down the road or next season, Araiza is punting for the Bengals or Colts, etc..

[UKBillFan]

16 minutes ago, Max Fischer said:

You mean the plaintiff. Like I said in another reply, are you betting the recordings don’t exist? It would be remarkable if the plaintiff and accuser made up what the tapes could easily disprove.  
 

IMO, it’s a sure bet the tape will prove Araiza said it, which is more than enough reason to cut him. 

Which bit is enough to cut him?

[BuffaloBud17]

15 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

I assume this is partly the reason that McDermott was so visibly upset. Unless you think that was an act.

 

He knew something about the allegations and still cut Haack, I think that is clear by what has been reported. No team should keep this kid until he can prove he is innocent.

[Chandler#81]

15 minutes ago, Beerball said:

Wow, where to begin? There’s so much wrong wrapped up here that I honestly don’t know where to start. 

HA! Absolutely everything is correct -to date..

[UKBillFan]

2 minutes ago, BuffaloBud17 said:

 

He knew something about the allegations and still cut Haack, I think that is clear by what has been reported. No team should keep this kid until he can prove he is innocent.

Since when has guilty until proven innocent been a thing?

[junior]

Regarding the fact that she was 17, I'm sure this will be Araiza's defense:

 

https://www.alecrose.com/blog-index/exceptions-to-sex-with-an-underage-person-statutory-rape-in-california/#:~:text=Under California laws%2C it is,cannot consent to sexual activities.

 

Exceptions to Sex with Underage Person in California

 

There are some exceptions, however, to sex with an underage person in California. These include:

 

Marital Exception –

A spouse having sex with their married minor spouse.

 

Reasonable Mistake Of Age –

Reasonable mistake of age with a person who is 16 or 17 years old. The mistaken belief has to be that the alleged victim was 18 or older.

 

These exceptions are designed to protect young people from facing criminal charges for having romantic relationships. An experienced attorney can evaluate every last detail of your unique situation and determine your best defense strategy

[NewEra]

12 minutes ago, SlimShady'sSpaceForce said:

Nearly 200 pages

 

dont you people have something better to do?

 

Seriously…..

 

I pop in and read the last page from time to time just to see wth people could be writing about.  Let’s find out what really happened, then discuss.  
 

if he did wrong, cut him, but wait til we find out what happened.
 

Til then, find another punter 

 

the second we cut him, the chiefs will be ready to pounce and sign him no matter his guilt

 

[LabattBlue]

Keeping Araiza will mean a media circus with him in the center ring, all season long. Unless there is a way to suspend him until this gets cleared up, he has to be cut…even if it means later on, he gets signed by another team and becomes a ten year all-pro.  

[eball]

9 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I agree that this social media driven tendency to rush to judgment rather than letting the process play out is really regrettable, but there is no question that what is out there looks bad for Araiza. 

 

Personally I both believe that the allegations are likely proveable and that the burden still lies on the plaintiff (and / or state) to prove it and guilt or civil liability is for a real court not the court of public opinion. 

 

That said if, as looks likely, Araiza has lied to the Bills then he is done here in a football sense regardless of what happens later in terms of the allegations against him. 

 

I agree that if Araiza lied to the Bills, that should be it for him here regardless of the eventual result of the allegations.

 

[stevewin]

37 minutes ago, hemma said:

I bet it was an extra crappy flight home.

Especially for the guy who got stuck sitting next to Araiza.... "Boy I'm tired just gonna put on these headphones and sleep the whole flight"

[jkirchofer]

1 minute ago, UKBillFan said:

Since when has guilty until proven innocent been a thing?

You act like the Buffalo Bills require the same burden of proof as the courts. Just like many jobs, the NFL is at will employment. If any of us were accused of such a heinous crime, you better believe our companies would let us go due, in large part, to optics. At some point he lied to the Bills staff and to the NFL. Based on the constant preaching of culture by Bills staff that should alone be enough to cut Araiza. The only place he is innocent until proven guilty is the court of law. No one else owes him that.

[UKBillFan]

Just now, BTB said:

Keeping Araiza will mean a media circus with him in the center ring, all season long. Unless there is a way to suspend him until this gets cleared up, he has to be cut…even if it means later on, he gets signed by another team and becomes a ten year all-pro.  

The Bills have helped cause the circus though. If they had cut him on Tuesday - no circus. If they had announced he would not play until this was sorted - no circus. If they hadn’t released that statement claiming they had carried out a thorough investigation - fewer awkward questions asked. Arguably McDermott should have said he would not be addressing the Araiza issue last night and focused on the game.

 

The Bills are adding to the frenzy rather than dousing the fire.

[NoSaint]

1 minute ago, junior said:

Regarding the fact that she was 17, I'm sure this will be Araiza's defense:

 

https://www.alecrose.com/blog-index/exceptions-to-sex-with-an-underage-person-statutory-rape-in-california/#:~:text=Under California laws%2C it is,cannot consent to sexual activities.

 

Exceptions to Sex with Underage Person in California

 

There are some exceptions, however, to sex with an underage person in California. These include:

 

Marital Exception –

A spouse having sex with their married minor spouse.

 

Reasonable Mistake Of Age –

Reasonable mistake of age with a person who is 16 or 17 years old. The mistaken belief has to be that the alleged victim was 18 or older.

 

These exceptions are designed to protect young people from facing criminal charges for having romantic relationships. An experienced attorney can evaluate every last detail of your unique situation and determine your best defense strategy

 

and his defense is likely that paired with “I know nothing about the other allegations”

 

which may be a navigable strategy in court but sure will be a tough road to manage in the headlines. 
 

id venture that’s what the bills were told and they did not expect that public firebombing from the lawyer sharing so much and at this particular crossroad in the timeline 

[UKBillFan]

1 minute ago, jkirchofer said:

You act like the Buffalo Bills require the same burden of proof as the courts. Just like many jobs, the NFL is at will employment. If any of us were accused of such a heinous crime, you better believe our companies would let us go due, in large part, to optics. At some point he lied to the Bills staff and to the NFL. Based on the constant preaching of culture by Bills staff that should alone be enough to cut Araiza. The only place he is innocent until proven guilty is the court of law. No one else owes him that.

Not sure if it’s different in the US, but in the U.K. you cannot automatically sack someone on the basis of an allegation. Suspend on full pay, yes, but not sack.

[LeGOATski]

10 minutes ago, BuffaloBud17 said:

 

He knew something about the allegations and still cut Haack, I think that is clear by what has been reported. No team should keep this kid until he can prove he is innocent.

This seems backwards. But I think it was very disingenuous of Araiza to not make NFL teams aware of this issue during the draft process.

[BuffaloBud17]

10 minutes ago, UKBillFan said:

Since when has guilty until proven innocent been a thing?

 

That's true...but in business, entertainment and sports people are put on leave all the time when facing serious allegations like this. He at the least admitted to sleeping with a underage girl (whether he knew her age or not) and knowingly exposing her to a STD according to those texts.

Edited August 27, 2022 by BuffaloBud17

[CSBill]

Putting aside the way more important human side of this (the victim, Araiza, the others accused, etc.), this is me talking not as a decent human being, but simply as a fanatical fan of the Buffalo Bills. At the risk of being tied at the TBD stake to be verbally torchered, here goes . . .

 

What is obvious is this is an organizational failure, or at least a serious break in the system. Something went wrong in the process of evaluating this player's fitness for the team. There are people in the organization who are paid good money to do just that. But something broke. It seems undeniable at this point that there was publicly accessible knowledge of the accusation long before the draft. The Bills either missed that--which is inexcusable; or ignored that--which is even worse than missing it; or did know it, evaluated it, and concluded there was not enough there to stop them from drafting him.

 

Moreover, since the draft, and as recently as three weeks ago, they were presented with more information. Someone in the organization--how could Beane and McDermott not be involved at this point? And ownership?--accessed it, and decided there was not enough there to stop them from going ahead with the player involved (evidence by the release of Haack).

 

What I concluded from the events of the past few days, and most certainly from McDermott's press conference last evening, is something was either missed, or was withheld to them? Maybe? Maybe? that is all on the player and his people? In either case, the organization, the systems of the organization, failed the team.

 

Now I concede, it's possible they did know everything and concluded the evidence was false or there was nothing to this and it was worth the risk/reward to go forward with the player.

 

BUT, if that is the case, again, this is a failure of the organization to read the zeitgeist of the day (see the Browns and the public relations disaster that situation has been for them and the NFL). How could they not see what a sh*** show was coming and the potential distraction (disruption? derailment?) this could be to the team--especially for a team with such high potential and expectations.

 

Your job as leaders is to be sure all potential --and this is the key thought -- "controllable" or "preventable" distractions are avoided. It appears there were multiple exit points in the process that could have been, but were not taken.

 

So, what I conclude, is based on the information and the press conference, that their is a system break or communication problem somewhere in the Bills front offices, and that is an organizational failure. I think the emotions and response of McDermott last night clearly shows that.

 

If my theory is right, this is a watershed moment for this team. If there are some internal systems that are broke, or more likely, inadequacies, then those have to be fixed. It takes time to build Trust, but it can be lost in moment. Not to be over dramatic, but this is the moment for the Bills.

 

I do not want to the Bills to be generally categorized with the Cleveland Browns. Is it fixable? Yes. There will be damage, so what happens over the next few days will be telling.

 

As a fan, Please! Please! Please! Buffalo Bills, fix it now and do not let this derail the entire season.

 

. . . .

 

Again, this is simply me as a fan. Forgive me for any form of insensitivity this communicates to the people involved, or to anyone on this board who has ever been affected by similar horrible events. This editorial in no way reflects my heart towards you or the people of these tragic circumstances.

 

 

 

 

Edited August 27, 2022 by CSBill

[jkirchofer]

Just now, UKBillFan said:

Not sure if it’s different in the US, but in the U.K. you cannot automatically sack someone on the basis of an allegation. Suspend on full pay, yes, but not sack.

Nope, in the US at-will employment means your employer can fire you for any reason at anytime as long as it isn't a violation of the law. Firing someone based on allegations of a crime is permissable if they can prove it violated conditions in a contract, made you unfit for the position, or impacted the business.

[HOUSE]

8 minutes ago, NewEra said:

Seriously…..

 

I pop in and read the last page from time to time just to see wth people could be writing about.  Let’s find out what really happened, then discuss.  
 

if he did wrong, cut him, but wait til we find out what happened.
 

Til then, find another punter 

 

the second we cut him, the chiefs will be ready to pounce and sign him no matter his guilt

 

The Chiefs could have drafted Araiza in the 5th round....I am not seeing the love 🤔