Matt Araiza accused of rape, served with a lawsuit.

[NoSaint]

20 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Pardon, but in this context, I disagree.  People are saying that Araiza committed statutory rape if he admitted he had sex with her.  In that context, it's a relevant legal fact that in California, "mistake in age" where you have reasonable cause to believe someone is over 18 is apparently a defense.  So if she was lying about her age and saying she was an 18 yr old college girl, and Araiza had sex with her under that belief, legally he may be in the clear.

 

Morally, of course, there's a lot amiss with the whole situation, starting with "don't further inebriate already inebriated young women for sexual favors, find their friends and send them home" and progressing to "Cockblock rapists, don't Feed them"

yea- a lot of folks struggling with the side by side issues here.

 

the range could go from sleeping with a girl a few months shy of 18 and possibly legally defensible on that count through to then setting up a gang rape. 
 

it seems likely that we are going to see the first half of that play out somehow. It’s generally accepted he slept with her, factual she was underage and now there has to be a discussion of what she represented or he should’ve known. Litigating his knowledge of her age isn’t slut shaming. It is just the reality of the possible charge. 

 

The gang rape situation is a huge wildcard. The information I’ve seen leaves more questions than answers. 
 

that the two discussions are events in the same evening has made this a mess for message boards, headlines, and social media graphics. It can’t be distilled to short form like that. If it becomes apparent he truly was an accomplice in the gang rape it quickly can be distilled to him being a monster in 140 characters or less.

Edited August 27, 2022 by NoSaint

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

2 hours ago, Wayne Cubed said:

Again, I gave you two examples that lasted an entire season and hung over the Pats**. Those same things happened. It didn’t effect them one bit.

 

And how would you actually know if it did. The Bills organisation is a tight ship, those things don’t leak out.

 

I seriously doubt McD is so distracted he can’t focus on the Rams right now. 

 

Well, it's at least well documented that Bill Belicheck has no soul. So that in it's self helps a great deal in him being able to tune out outside distractions. McDermott is cut from a different cloth than Bill. I couldn't ever imagine Bill showing the emotions that McDermott did in a press conference like the one last night.

[Herc11]

21 minutes ago, Freddie's Dead said:

 

The stories about her lying about her age is slut shaming, plain and simple.  Following the Koby Bryant playbook step by step.

So lying about your age means your a slut now? 

 

Talk about reaching

[NoSaint]

6 minutes ago, hemma said:

IMO, the ‘I am 18’ declaration never took place.

Why would a person announce they are 18, when the legal drinking age is 21?

because no one cares about the legal drinking age at a college party, but they do care about high school kids showing up?

[SCBills]

3 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

I don’t recall that anyone said this age declaration (or question) took place. Her side is saying she told them she was in HS. His side is saying she told people she was in college. Her diary says she told them she went to Grossmont. Grossmont is the name of both an area HS and area college. 

Yea… independent of the major allegation, if that’s the story from both sides on the age issue, I’m saying Araiza’s side is correct. 
 

If you go to a college party, and tell people you go to a school that is both a high school and college without clarifying which … you know what you’re doing by saying that. 
 

Edited August 27, 2022 by SCBills

[QLBillsFan]

Couple things:

 

1. No matter what this young girl had a terrible thing happen to her. I wish her peace and the strength to get through it.

2. I’m surprised the Bills with apparently some knowledge of the situation didn’t dig deeper. Particularly post Watson situation.

3. The Bills reputation is on the line. An honest transparent presser post     “ addition investigation”. Where they release the punter and apologize for not doing the right thing originally. This could railroad what is expected to be a potential SB season. 

 

[Alphadawg7]

10 minutes ago, Freddie's Dead said:

 

This is the Koby Bryant playbook.  You keep saying "consensual", even when not possible in a legal sense.  I vented because the number of posts saying she consented is simple slut shaming.

 

I think you are misreading what has been said.  First, I think I can say confidently that really no one is questioning that she was attacked, that all seems credible and tragic.  But, the question is did Matt have any involvement with the attack either as someone who helped facilitate it by taking her to them or participating in the actual attack.  

 

The word consensual is being used strictly in regard to the information out there that seems to point to a private encounter involving only Matt and the victim outside the house, where by all accounts so far, seems to have been non forceful and both parties willfully participating in it.  

 

I get where you are coming from, you are saying its still not consent if she is wasted.  But, the issue is, there is a lot we do not know at this time still.  

1. We don't know the factual details of what they did or did not do outside the house.  
2. We don't know her intoxication level at the time of the first encounter.  We know she was wasted, possibly drugged even, when she was being assaulted.  But that does not also automatically mean she was in the same state when her and Matt allegedly had a prior encounter earlier in the night.  

I will say that both sides seem to have in some way acknowledged the prior encounter and it being consensual from what I gathered.  Nothing I have seen has the plaintiff accusing Matt of a non consensual assault prior to the actual assault that occurred in the room.  

 

So for all practical purposes, until we know any definitive information about the alleged first encounter, consent was presumed because the plaintiff has not stated anything refuting that yet.  

 

I think all of us feel horrible for this woman, and no one here that I have seen is "slut shaming" her like you said previously. 

[Freddie's Dead]

6 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Pardon, but in this context, I disagree.  People are saying that Araiza committed statutory rape if he admitted he had sex with her.  In that context, it's a relevant legal fact that in California, "mistake in age" where you have reasonable cause to believe someone is over 18 is apparently a defense.  So if she was lying about her age and saying she was an 18 yr old college girl, and Araiza had sex with her under that belief, legally he may be in the clear.

 

Morally, of course, there's a lot amiss with the whole situation, starting with "don't further inebriate already inebriated young women for sexual favors, find their friends and send them home" and progressing to "Cockblock rapists, don't Feed them"

 

Whether she lied about her age or not, putting that out in the public media is simply trying to shame the victim and dirty her up in the court of public opinion, taint the jury pool, etc.  Keep repeating that she lied about her age, had "consensual" sex that she "agreed" to, even though legally she couldn't consent and couldn't agree.  The dirtier the better.  And judging by many responses in this forum, it's working to a T.  You are correct about the "mistake in age", but few are drawing that distinction in these pages.

[YoloinOhio]

1 minute ago, QLBillsFan said:

Couple things:

 

1. No matter what this young girl had a terrible thing happen to her. I wish her peace and the strength to get through it.

2. I’m surprised the Bills with apparently some knowledge of the situation didn’t dig deeper. Particularly post Watson situation.

3. The Bills reputation is on the line. An honest transparent presser post     “ addition investigation”. Where they release the punter and apologize for not doing the right thing originally. This could railroad what is expected to be a potential SB season. 

 

Should the release him before they know if he was involved in  what is being alleged? That’s the question. 

Edited August 27, 2022 by YoloinOhio

[Jerome007]

The point here is not if he knew if she was 17 or if she lied, the point is we all don't know tons of details yet. Still so many people would hang Araiza to the nearest tree without a care. If he raped, that's a huge thing, obviously, and make everything else a moot point. But a 21 yo dude having sex with a 17yo gal present at a college party is not exactly something to prevent a guy from having a career! 

[Big Blitz]

1 hour ago, Boyst62 said:

I'm tired of the gaslighting by WGR

 

The mantra of "the Bills won't cut him so we are forced to talk about him" is hilarious.

 

The afternoon guys doing pre-game said " as long as he is on the team this is the only thing we will be able to talk about. They need to do something" was the biggest example of how piss-poor the media is on the connection to reality.

 

These doofs have the mic. They can literally talk about anything.

 

 

They're a disgrace. 

 

Both shooting for "Virtue Signaler of the month."  

 

[K-9]

10 minutes ago, Freddie's Dead said:

 

The stories about her lying about her age is slut shaming, plain and simple.  Following the Koby Bryant playbook step by step.

What is the logic behind this statement? Lying about your age has nothing to do with your level of promiscuity one way or the other.
 

From a legal standpoint, I think it’s interesting that many states have exemptions for statutory rape defendants if there is a reasonable expectation for the defendant to have believed the victim was of legal age. For example and as I mentioned yesterday, California has the “Mistake of Facts” provision allowing defendants to present evidence that there was a “reasonable and actual belief” that the victim was 18 or older. Things like attire, appearance, presence at an adult party are all elements a defendant may use to prove he believed the victim was of legal age. So Araiza’s lawyer has some legal arrows in his quiver when it comes to the allegation that he had sex with a minor.
 

But participating in a gang rape is an entirely different matter. If it can be proved that he participated, he deserves to be punished to the fullest extent. 

[NyQuil]

9 minutes ago, Pokebball said:

Or you can wait until the truth is known and not be wrong. That's the choice many of us are making.

 

Why do you feel forced to choose a side before you know the facts?

I’ve been called a rapist on other sites for suggesting waiting until the truth is known.

[SCBills]

5 minutes ago, Freddie's Dead said:

 

Whether she lied about her age or not, putting that out in the public media is simply trying to shame the victim and dirty her up in the court of public opinion, taint the jury pool, etc.  Keep repeating that she lied about her age, had "consensual" sex that she "agreed" to, even though legally she couldn't consent and couldn't agree.  The dirtier the better.  And judging by many responses in this forum, it's working to a T.  You are correct about the "mistake in age", but few are drawing that distinction in these pages.

You do realize statutory rape is a thing, yes?

 

We can’t talk about the validity of that allegation because it may come across as harming her side?

 

If she said she goes to Grossmont (both sides seem to agree she said that) and it’s both a high school and college, and she’s at a college party, what do you believe that implies?

 

It doesn’t mean she’s lying about the assault allegation.  It doesn’t mean she’s a slut.  What it does mean is that Araiza likely shouldn’t be found guilty of statutory rape, and maybe people should stop lumping that in with the other allegation because they made their mind up that he’s guilty and it’s more dirt on the grave. 
 

 

Edited August 27, 2022 by SCBills

[Beck Water]

16 minutes ago, Cheektowaga Chad said:

Here is a potential poor decision posts where asking about

If you are having to ask a girl what her age is she is too young for you

 

Spoken like a guy who hasn't been to a college party in more than a decade, or known anyone who has.  Some women in their mid-20s look older than some girls in their mid-teens.  Fact, Jack.

 

10 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

Maybe she was actually looking to have sex herself? You mean to tell me high school girls just like high school guys aren't all trying to get laid. I mean she did consent to sex so maybe she told him that because she was looking to actually have sex with someone at the party

 

Yes, I mean to tell you high school girls (and college girls) aren't "ALL" trying to get laid.

 

Some of them are - for sure.  They 100% set out to hook up, they play "treasure hunt" party games (kiss a guy you don't know, let him feel you up, do a body shot, give a BJ etc).  I had a kid just graduate college, that wasn't her thing but she knew all about it.

 

Some of them just want to dress sexy and bask in feeling admired and flirt and drink and go home and sleep it off.

 

The assumption that 100% of the latter, actually are the former or can be persuaded or inebriated into being the former, causes a lot of social and legal problems on HS and college campuses today.

 

 

Edited August 27, 2022 by Beck Water

[QLBillsFan]

3 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

Should the release him before they know if he was involved in  what is being alleged? That’s the question. 

Sorry key point. If he’s shown to be involved. Think the challenge is this thing will both linger and likely not definitively prove his innocence. It’s civil not criminal so far.

[Herc11]

5 minutes ago, Freddie's Dead said:

 

Whether she lied about her age or not, putting that out in the public media is simply trying to shame the victim and dirty her up in the court of public opinion, taint the jury pool, etc.  Keep repeating that she lied about her age, had "consensual" sex that she "agreed" to, even though legally she couldn't consent and couldn't agree.  The dirtier the better.  And judging by many responses in this forum, it's working to a T.  You are correct about the "mistake in age", but few are drawing that distinction in these pages.

So she can accuse someone of rape, but when witnesses accuse her of lying about her age, thats wrong?

[Rocky Landing]

McDermott said several times in his presser last night that he wanted to find the "truth," and then "do the right thing." I think McDermott is a very decent man. He certainly knows that cutting Matt Araiza now would likely end his career in the NFL, regardless of how the lawsuit plays out. I think this presents a serious moral dilemma for him. What if everything Araiza is saying is true?

 

But, even if it is, the right thing to do for the team is to cut Araiza immediately. To call this situation a distraction is an understatement.

 

In my opinion, I think the best thing to happen at this moment for the team would be for Terry Pegula to step in and put an end to it. I know he has generally been pretty hands off, but it's not just the team that is distracted-- it's McDermott. Pegula should send Araiza packing, and get the team back to football.

[NoSaint]

7 minutes ago, QLBillsFan said:

Couple things:

 

1. No matter what this young girl had a terrible thing happen to her. I wish her peace and the strength to get through it.

2. I’m surprised the Bills with apparently some knowledge of the situation didn’t dig deeper. Particularly post Watson situation.

3. The Bills reputation is on the line. An honest transparent presser post     “ addition investigation”. Where they release the punter and apologize for not doing the right thing originally. This could railroad what is expected to be a potential SB season. 

 

If this is truly a SB team, this should not derail the season unless they handle it in an unimaginable manner. 

[Jamie Mueller]

I'm not minimizing or trivializing what may or may not have happened here... if the posted story is factual then it's a truly horrible thing. I'm just wondering, why is Araiza being confronted with a civil lawsuit... rather than with criminal charges?