Matt Araiza

[Buffalo_Stampede]

5 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

That is correct. That is NOT how our system works. It is up to the accuser to PROVE that what they are claiming is true. Not the other way around. 

Question. Why is the accuser’s name sealed but not the accused? We all know the answer but I’ll listen to you explanation.

[StHustle]

28 minutes ago, SCBills said:

 

But it was these accounts, the podcasters, these content creators that organized the online mafia mob.   They silenced all of us who cautioned patience and could have tempered the rage … they stoked it … for clout. 
 

We can’t control a national narrative, but our local influencers can be above it.  Clearly, they’ve shown, they’re not. 
 

Just about all of them cared more about how they would look to the masses if they didn’t take a stand against the young man, more than doing what was right. They all wanted to seem appalled and most went after the Bills for not cutting him soon as they found out as well as bashing the organization’s investigation and just assumed it was a failure when it was an absolute success.

[Buffalo_Stampede]

1 minute ago, Shemp said:

In our once-fair country, it's now guilty before proven innocent. Things are now inverted. But don't worry, we have Satanist clubs in primary schools, so there's hope for the future. 😒

It was fair for some people, definitely not all people. Also in the past rich could just control what was written so it was much easier to hide an investigation.

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Question. Why is the accuser’s name sealed but not the accused? We all know the answer but I’ll listen to you explanation.

Huh?  Protecting the accuser is NOT the same as believing the accuser. However, I do not believe in protecting the accuser in all circumstances. When the accuser is a 'minor', or in the case of an employee there are reasons for those protections....but not in general.

[bigK14094]

Prosecutors: Former Bills punter Matt Araiza wasn't present during alleged gang rape (yahoo.com)  Tried to post the link but it didn't work.  

[Buffalo_Stampede]

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

Huh?  Protecting the accuser is NOT the same as believing the accuser. However, I do not believe in protecting the accuser in all circumstances. When the accuser is a 'minor', or in the case of an employee there are reasons for those protections....but not in general.

Protect the accuser from what exactly?

 

Its so obvious why accused names shouldn’t be released.

[NewEra]

Just now, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Question, if a female in your family said she was raped would you say ok, let’s see the actual proof? Let’s get his side of story?

 

The reason people react the way they do to sexual assault is because so many people have been assaulted. Many times charges are never filed or dismissed.

If it were my mother, mother in law or my wife?  Those are the only women in my family that I’d take a bullet for. Of course I’d act irrationally.  I trust them indefinitely.  I KNOW their character.  
 

Other than them, aunts and cousins that I don’t know nearly as well….. I’d want to see proof in order to believe them 💯.  I wouldn’t ask them for proof…. But that’s what I would think in my mind. I’d feel sympathetic for sure.  
 

there are many women that I’ve worked with over the years that I consider my friends, whom I’d want to see proof in order to believe 💯 as well. 
 

I don’t see how your question has anything to do with the court of public opinion.  That’s where the problem lies. 

 

[bigK14094]

Just now, bigK14094 said:

Prosecutors: Former Bills punter Matt Araiza wasn't present during alleged gang rape (yahoo.com)  Tried to post the link but it didn't work.  

This is a detailed article if you can get to it.  Civil suit will continue and will fail but will be a trial.  

[78thealltimegreat]

1 hour ago, 4merper4mer said:

A Tweet says he has proof he was elsewhere.  There have been lots of things said on Twitter by both sides, lots of conjecture and lots of fact twisting by both sides.  There has also been a lot biased and misleading statements by “journalists” like Tim Graham who don’t understand the meaning of “direct quote” or who do understand it and purposely misuse it.

 

You’ll pardon me if I’d prefer more than a tweet as “proof”.

 

Edit:  I see now that there is more than just the Tweet and that the article offers more and seemingly objective information.  I would still disagree with your statement of fact that he has proof he wasn’t there.  He may very well have that proof but the article does not offer anything that constitutes objective truth.

 

It’s clear his reputation was ruined by the Bills?  Shirley.

People like yourself believed her. He will never get his reputation back by part of society because of this I’d sue everyone if I were in his shoes and let the chips fall where they may. 

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Protect the accuser from what exactly?

 

Its so obvious why accused names shouldn’t be released.

Protecting them from retaliation in the case of an employee for example. This simply cannot be that foreign of a concept to you.....is it? 

[Real McClappy]

I wouldn't mind a punter with a 69yard punt average through college on my team. 

 

Matt got bent over for false accusations.  

[SCBills]

Not gonna lie .. it’s going to be rough if another team signs him and he’s out there booming kicks for someone else.

 

Scrolling through Twitter as this story is becoming more and more known and I see fanbases from all over tweeting at their teams to sign him. 
 

I truly hope he gets signed this summer … just not to an AFC East team or KC/CIN. 
 

Edited May 9, 2023 by SCBills

[Franco_92]

6 minutes ago, bigK14094 said:

Prosecutors: Former Bills punter Matt Araiza wasn't present during alleged gang rape (yahoo.com)  Tried to post the link but it didn't work.  

It's in the first post in the thread lol

[John from Riverside]

5 minutes ago, bigK14094 said:

This is a detailed article if you can get to it.  Civil suit will continue and will fail but will be a trial.  

I’m not sure why she would follow through with a civil suit, whenever there are prosecutors saying that he wasn’t there what would the grounds of that civil suit be?
 

I’m just glad that he didn’t do it hoping that I get some semblance of his life back

[Franco_92]

Has anyone brought this up on WGR yet today?

[Gugny]

14 minutes ago, Shemp said:

In our once-fair country, it's now guilty before proven innocent. Things are now inverted. But don't worry, we have Satanist clubs in primary schools, so there's hope for the future. 😒

I don’t think these “Satanist Clubs” are what you think they are. I wish they had them when my son was in school. 
 

https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/what-is-an-after-school-satan-club/amp/

 

[NewEra]

15 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Don’t believe the accuser?

How about you believe the accuser when they’re proven to be telling the truth.  At least see some credible evidence?  
 

Until then, form your own opinion based on whatever you feel proper.  If you think it’s ok to make snap judgements based on someone’s word and participate in cancel culture based, that’s your right.  But it’s part of the problem.  In fact, it IS the problem now that everyone posts their opinion on social media for the world to see.  It’s a snowball effect based on one persons accusations.  
 

again-  innocent until proven guilty.  The judicial system has many flaws and gets a lot wrong- but I think the standard we are taught begins there.  Innocent until proven guilty.  In todays world, the accused are guilty until proven innocent.  As was with Araiza.  

9 minutes ago, SCBills said:

Not gonna lie .. it’s going to be rough if another team signs him and he’s out there booming kicks for someone else.

 

Scrolling through Twitter as this story is becoming more and more known and I see fanbases from all over tweeting at their teams to sign him. 
 

I truly hope he gets signed this summer … just not to an AFC East team or KC/CIN. 
 

I’d be shocked if he’s not signed by TC.  Good for him.  Kid got railroaded.  
 

that said, we know he’ll end up with an AFC contender 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

1 minute ago, NewEra said:

How about you believe the accuser when they’re proven to be telling the truth.  At least see some credible evidence?  
 

Until then, form your own opinion based on whatever you feel proper.  If you think it’s ok to make snap judgements based on someone’s word and participate in cancel culture based, that’s your right.  But it’s part of the problem.  In fact, it IS the problem now that everyone posts their opinion on social media for the world to see.  It’s a snowball effect based on one persons accusations.  
 

again-  innocent until proven guilty.  The judicial system has many flaws and gets a lot wrong- but I think the standard we are taught begins there.  Innocent until proven guilty.  In todays world, the accused are guilty until proven innocent.  As was with Araiza.  

In the past many people have gotten away with it. That’s why the world is how it is today. 
 

Simple solution is seal the names. 

 

[SCBills]

 

[GunnerBill]

4 minutes ago, NewEra said:

How about you believe the accuser when they’re proven to be telling the truth.  At least see some credible evidence?  
 

Until then, form your own opinion based on whatever you feel proper.  If you think it’s ok to make snap judgements based on someone’s word and participate in cancel culture based, that’s your right.  But it’s part of the problem.  In fact, it IS the problem now that everyone posts their opinion on social media for the world to see.  It’s a snowball effect based on one persons accusations.  
 

again-  innocent until proven guilty.  The judicial system has many flaws and gets a lot wrong- but I think the standard we are taught begins there.  Innocent until proven guilty.  In todays world, the accused are guilty until proven innocent.  As was with Araiza.  

 

I agree. And the undignified social media pile on means they are not just perceived as guilty but they are often punished as if guilt is proven even where it isn't. 

 

I have to be careful what I say now on public fora given my current role, but I worry we have (for often well meaning reasons) stripped away the clinical objectivity that you need in a criminal justice system to create something akin to a victim justice system. It is a dangerous road IMO.