Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
12 minutes ago, Big Turk said:

 

If someone goes out somewhere with the intent of something happening and does so with motivation, then should we be surprised when it happens? Intent matters.

 

someone gets a gun and tells people they are going out with the intent to murder someone. They shoot a person, but then claim it was self defense and they weren't planning on killing anyone.  Do you believe them?

 

There is a BIG difference between consensual sex and rape. I doubt she was looking to get raped. (And I’m not saying she was, but the distinction had to be pointed out.) 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

It should be noted that the bills cut Matt Araiza, so he could focus on the investigation. They figured, he would not be able to adequately focus on football while also focusing on this. He also, was clearly way to close to the alleged rape. Whether he was part of the gang rape or not, he still had sex with her that night. 

 

Everybody saying he is innocent until proven guilty. I mean, basically, he went from a jail sentence, to just being forced into working an everyday normal job like the rest of us. He doesn't need to keep his million dollar job, to be "free".

Posted
17 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

So then you're cool with Deshaun Watson too then?  There wasn't enough evidence to charge him either.

 

I mean, he's playing now, right?

 

 

Posted
36 minutes ago, HOUSE said:

Inocent till proven guilty 

Not in the court of public opinion. These days it’s “guilty until proven innocent but you’re still guilty anyways teehee”.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
55 minutes ago, Draconator said:

WILL THIS THREAD GET TO 300 PAGES LIKE THE OTHER THREAD!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

With one person adding puke emojis to every post like the other thread?

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted

Imo…

 

The girl was slutted out. Came home late, drunk and marked up from being choked and hair pulled…and needed an excuse for her parents.

 

It never set right with her story of getting raped for an hour while her friends waited for things to finish up.

Posted
59 minutes ago, HOUSE said:

Ah oh, here comes the TBD attorneys, 

Section 3 paragraph 6 

The real question is: more internet attorneys in this thread than internet doctors in the Von thread?

Posted

Guess it was only a matter of time after the video of her lying about her age came out.  Probably didn’t help bragging about ***** over 20 guys

Posted
25 minutes ago, HardyBoy said:

 

I mean you're just flat out wrong on that.

 

You also sound like you think that if someone was arrested then they are obviously guilty.

 

If I want to prove you are wearing socks under your sneakers in a court of law, I need to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

I can be positive you're wearing socks based on all the evidence I have leading me to make that reasonable assumption, but I can't prove it. That doesn't mean me thinking you have socks on is full of crap, it just means i do not have the evidence required to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Normally i would agree but the DAs wording that the evidence doesnt support the charges tells me they are calling her a liar. He said they dont support... he didnt say there wasnt sufficient evidence.

 

If he had said the latter I would agree with you. But based off the wording it tells me they reviewed the evidence and it doesnt corroborate her story 

26 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

100% false. Could not possibly be more wrong if it was your explicit intent.

I mean its true... the DA said evidence does not support the charges. The DA did not say that there was not sufficient evidence.

 

The first statement says the evidence doesnt match the story and the charges brought upon him.

Posted
18 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

I appreciate the consistency, at least.

Make no mistake, there's a difference between Araiza and Watson. VOLUME.

 

It's easy to think that one case may have no merit. But 25? That's a bit bigger a hurdle to overcome.

 

Posted

Prosecutor was in a tough spot given the possible scenarios:

 

1. he raped her

2. he raped then gang raped her

3. He raped her then pimped her over to his boys, who gang raped her

 

Faced with this, Prosecutor concluded he could never proves which of these was most likely.  Each charge brings reasonable doubt on the other…..

Posted

There's a difference between being falsely accused and not having enough evidence to go to trial. If it's the former, he should be allowed to murder her, but it's probably the latter.

Posted
2 minutes ago, uticaclub said:

There's a difference between being falsely accused and not having enough evidence to go to trial. If it's the former, he should be allowed to murder her, but it's probably the latter.

 

As far as Araiza is concerned, it's probably the former.  For his teammates and the gang rape, it's probably the latter.

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