Matt Araiza

[4merper4mer]

2 minutes ago, 78thealltimegreat said:

The last line says I can

The last line said that the Bills hurt Araiza the punter but did the right thing for Araiza the person.  What the Bills did was:

1. Cut the punter reducing his career by 1 year, perhaps more.

2. Gave the person back 80+ hours a week that would have been spent on football activities that could now be used to defend his name.

3. Removed him from a spotlight of unrelenting and unpredictable social justice warriors like Tim Graham who would have come fully prepared to make up definitions for things like “direct quote” and get as many clicks as possible out of the situation.  This also took away a large part of the woman’s lawyer’s soap box and publicity hunt.

4. Decline their prerogative to ask for their signing bonus back based on “character clauses”.  This would have been a dumb move but my guess is they could have sought it.

 

I re-read my last line a few times to try to determine how you took it to mean I think Araiza is a terrible person.  Illiteracy on your part is all I could come up with.  If you’re not illiterate maybe you can further explain what you meant and how exactly you think I judged Araiza as a horrible person by what I wrote. 

[Radar]

15 hours ago, streetkings01 said:

It’ll get overlooked……people will still refer to him as a rapist…..once your labeled it’s no shaking it even if your found innocent.

Unfortunately this so true.

[Beck Water]

21 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

The Bills did the right thing, because he admitted to having sex with a minor. 

 

They couldn't keep him on the team while being investigated for rape and an ongoing civil suit. 

 

I think it's in Matt's best interest to come out and say he made mistakes, but he never met to hurt anyone. He hopes this girl gets whatever helps she needs because she seems like she needs a lot of help... That he should never have put himself, his family and his teammates in this position.  But ultimately he has been proved innocent of the terrible accusation of rape, and that no one should hold that label over him because that's not who he is.

 

Under law, there's no such thing as "proved innocent".  For the sake of everyone who might face a false accusation, there really should be, but "not guilty" or "no case" is not the same as "proved innocent"

 

In Araiza's situation, the prosecutor is saying they could not pursue criminal charges where the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt", because there is evidence Araiza had left the party long before the alleged rape and that there is not evidence of unconsensual sex in the videos they have.  These things create legitimate reasonable doubt.

 

The accuser's lawyer is saying the evidence for Araiza having left is the statement of one of Araiza's friends, and that in the pretext call Araiza didn't speak as though he'd left the party.  The plaintiff's lawyer is making it pretty clear they intend to pursue the civil suit where the standard is "more likely than not", so this isn't over.

 

There's someone on this board who had the goal of a professional sport career at one time. they told me they just shot out of situations like that party, because of the potential for reputation-busting trouble.

 

32 minutes ago, teef said:

i agree with this as well.  when you run a business, you have to rid yourself of anything bad for business, and let's face it, the nfl and the bills sure are a business.  it's not necessarily right, but i don't think that's anything that's going to change soon.  at the end of the day, matt was wildly unlucky to even run into that girl.  it sucks.

That's one way to look at it, another way is that we all can make our own luck to some degree. 

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

7 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

You're coming from the perspective of a defense attorney. Not a billion dollar community organization with a morality clause. 

If the case was just ‘a 17 year old girl snuck into a party,lied about her age, and Matt had consensual sex with her’ (which I’m sure is what the bills own investigation accurately concluded) I severely doubt there would have been any public outcry or pushback from the nfl at all

 

it was the other prove-ably false details in the diary that caused this to blow up. 

 

 

[Gigs]

14 hours ago, 1ManRaid said:

 

You weren't alone.  I was heavily in the "the evidence doesn't add up" camp.

So was I. I think in today's atmosphere society would have us labeled as victim shamers, when in reality there wasn't really any evidence against him and more to refute her claims. 

 

I mean, the other guys named in the case didn't know any of this until this blew up before the cut. And everything was ongoing for months but no big stink was made until he was a paid NFL punter. 

 

I believe everybody investigating figured there wasn't anything to go off of, and the lawyer got greedy in July/August. 

 

People should do hard time for false accusations; and that sentiment goes beyond this situation. 

[4merper4mer]

17 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

You're coming from the perspective of a defense attorney. Not a billion dollar community organization with a morality clause. 

I disagree with most of what @IronMaidenBills has written over the past few hours in this thread but on this one aspect I agree with him.  It’s unfortunate that this woman…..girl at the time…..represented herself as 18 and that Araiza and others apparently bought it……but it’s pretty clear she did so.  She is on film doing it albeit at a different party.  To me it is sad that stuff like this happens…..to me a 22 year old male probably shouldn’t just take someone at their word that they are 18…..but “to me” doesn’t really matter.  If you were going to cut all players who at one point in their lives had used questionable judgement, every team in the league would be way under the salary cap.

[Just in Atlanta]

14 hours ago, Fan in Chicago said:

Sorry if anyone has linked this thread earlier but if not, here it is. Lets see who amongst us rushed to judgment:

 

If Bills fans reacted like that, rushing to judgment with near zero facts, the ability to waver public opinion overall is going to be a Herculean task for this kid. 

 

[Beck Water]

9 minutes ago, Generic_Bills_Fan said:

If the case was just ‘a 17 year old girl snuck into a party,lied about her age, and Matt had consensual sex with her’ (which I’m sure is what the bills own investigation accurately concluded) I severely doubt there would have been any public outcry or pushback from the nfl at all

 

it was the other prove-ably false details in the diary that caused this to blow up.

 

Actually it was the civil suit filed by the girl's grandstanding "try this in the court of public opinion" lawyer which caused this to blow up. And he's making it clear that he's not going away.

 

I'm outta here now

[LeviF]

21 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

Under law, there's no such thing as "proved innocent".  For the sake of everyone who might face a false accusation, there really should be, but "not guilty" or "no case" is not the same as "proved innocent"

 

 

In some jurisdictions there actually is, typically found in cases of overturned convictions.

 

Ohio for example:

 

Quote

The court of common pleas in the county where the underlying criminal action was initiated has exclusive, original jurisdiction to hear and determine an action or proceeding that is commenced by an individual who satisfies divisions (A)(1) to (5) of section 2743.48 of the Revised Code and that seeks a determination by the court that an error in procedure of the type described in division (A)(5) of that section occurred, that the offense of which the individual was found guilty, including all lesser included offenses, was not committed by the individual, or that no offense was committed by any person.

 

[78thealltimegreat]

29 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

The last line said that the Bills hurt Araiza the punter but did the right thing for Araiza the person.  What the Bills did was:

1. Cut the punter reducing his career by 1 year, perhaps more.

2. Gave the person back 80+ hours a week that would have been spent on football activities that could now be used to defend his name.

3. Removed him from a spotlight of unrelenting and unpredictable social justice warriors like Tim Graham who would have come fully prepared to make up definitions for things like “direct quote” and get as many clicks as possible out of the situation.  This also took away a large part of the woman’s lawyer’s soap box and publicity hunt.

4. Decline their prerogative to ask for their signing bonus back based on “character clauses”.  This would have been a dumb move but my guess is they could have sought it.

 

I re-read my last line a few times to try to determine how you took it to mean I think Araiza is a terrible person.  Illiteracy on your part is all I could come up with.  If you’re not illiterate maybe you can further explain what you meant and how exactly you think I judged Araiza as a horrible person by what I wrote. 

Proving my point again thanks 

[Your Brown Eye]

50 minutes ago, 78thealltimegreat said:

Imagine being that kid when you literally weren’t even there being labeled for the rest of your life by complete strangers as a rapist. 

 

That's ok, those people hide behind their screen names and go around convincing themselves they are a good person.

[LeviF]

2 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

In some jurisdictions there actually is, typically found in cases of overturned convictions.

 

Ohio for example:

 

 

 

California also:

 

Quote

In any case where a person has been arrested and no accusatory pleading has been filed, the person arrested may petition the law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over the offense to destroy its records of the arrest. A copy of the petition shall be served upon the prosecuting attorney of the county or city having jurisdiction over the offense. The law enforcement agency having jurisdiction over the offense, upon a determination that the person arrested is factually innocent, shall, with the concurrence of the prosecuting attorney, seal its arrest records, and the petition for relief under this section for three years from the date of the arrest and thereafter destroy its arrest records and the petition.

 

Later in the section it then says that the petitioner may then truthfully answer "no" when asked if arrested on various forms.

[colin]

him having (evidently what we know now as consensual) ***** with this woman/girl who was under 18 (not sure on the legality of that given the situation where they were, but it's not age of majority so it's gonna get some concern) who he didn't have (im presuming but cmon) any kind of meaningful relationship with is what got the bills to cut ties w him, IMO.

 

in a fair world, they'd pay him a bunch of money he missed out on, and he'd got another punting job in the NFL, not sure if that happens in ours tho.

 

there was a guy who played at or was recruited by USC (banks i think?) as an LB.  he went to prison being falsely accused of the same crime, insanely got the woman to admit she made it up for money (law suit i think) and recorded it and got out.  If that were the subject of a film, i'd find it contrived and far fetched.

 

anyhow, i kinda knew that guy, he lived in my building (same floor) and we worked out together (same schedule, not planned).  I never asked him about it, only found out about it when mentioning it to a buddy of mine who follows college football more closely than i do.  anyhow, that dude mentioned to me because he as well had ***** with the woman in question, he became he said she said and he got railroaded.  totally not fair (obv) but from the Bills perspective, if they both admit they did the deed and it's an argument around the circumstances involved, it's not easy to defend.  cynical, but practical.

[EasternOHBillsFan]

So many "I told you so" holier-than-thou mouths piping up today... 

 

"During the call, Araiza acknowledged having sex with her, the lawsuit states, but later, when she asked him 'And did we have actual sex?' he responded 'This is Matt Araiza. I don't remember anything that happened that night' and hung up."

 

STILL doesn't change that fact as to what he said in that phone call. He may be innocent of the gang rape, but he's not 100% innocent in the entire affair.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-11149189/Bills-punter-Matt-Araiza-told-rape-accuser-17-tested-STDs.html

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:

So many "I told you so" holier-than-thou mouths piping up today... 

 

"During the call, Araiza acknowledged having sex with her, the lawsuit states, but later, when she asked him 'And did we have actual sex?' he responded 'This is Matt Araiza. I don't remember anything that happened that night' and hung up."

 

STILL doesn't change that fact as to what he said in that phone call. He may be innocent of the gang rape, but he's not 100% innocent in the entire affair.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-11149189/Bills-punter-Matt-Araiza-told-rape-accuser-17-tested-STDs.html

lol

 

just stop, man.

 

 

[Jauronimo]

15 hours ago, arcane said:

I have a pretty funny folder going on my home PC of tweets with 100s of thousands of likes/interactions containing blatant, often malicious lies from various bluecheck accounts, prominent papers and journalists etc. 

Whose quiet updates/corrections are tweeted later and receive audiences 2+ orders of magnitude smaller in size. 

Once the initial damage is done it will never come close to being fully  reversed, and a large chunk of our population is lobotomized because of this and countless other behaviors like it

 

Why?

[Beck Water]

 

13 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

California also:

 

 

Later in the section it then says that the petitioner may then truthfully answer "no" when asked if arrested on various forms.

 

Thanks, good to know.  I sit corrected.  But that isn't what's happened here, AFAIK, right?

[boyst]

2 hours ago, arcane said:

Has anyone brought this up on WGR yet today?

They won't. I'd love to call intl wgr this afternoon when the fat dude was harping and going full swing attacking the Bills and such. Id love to see the lardo eat some crow. 

[teef]

1 hour ago, Beck Water said:

That's one way to look at it, another way is that we all can make our own luck to some degree. 

i always agree with this idea, but did matt really do anything a college guy his age wouldn't do?  not saying that's right, but if anyone has dealt with men at that age, they should understand.  he didn't force himself on her, and it seemed to be completely consensual.  she just lied.

 

as an example of being lucky/unlucky, i'll throw out this story...

 

When i was a senior at BC, our youngest roommate finally turned 21, and we wanted to throw a big party for him.  it was football season, and we were playing navy that weekend.  being 21 year old, meaty guys, we decided to get him strippers as a gift.   we had fun all day at the tailgates, met a bunch of cadets from navy, and invited them over to hang out with us.  as you can imagine, the place got rowdy.  not bad, but a bit rowdy.  after people ran out of money, they started throwing change at the strippers.  that essentially ended the show, (as it should) as the handler grabbed the ladies and they left.  that was it.  

 

the next day i was approached by some girls i knew asking what happened.  i had no idea what they meant, but there were rumors going around that the guys were taking turns getting favors in the bathroom, which was 1000% not true.  the rumor died, and it was a nothing, but this in 1999 before social media.  who knows how bad that could have been.

 

fast forward a few years, and the duke lacrosse players incident happens.  they were accused of rape, nothing was true, and their lives were ruined.  at a reunion, the guy we had the party for made the comment that we could easily have been put in the same situation as those lacrosse players and would have been ruined.  especially with naval cadets there, that could have been national news.  i get that we could have avoided all of it by not having the strippers, but as guys that age, we never imagined this could be an outcome, and just wanted to have fun with our friends.  at the end of the day, we were just lucky it didn't turn into something it shouldn't.  there was almost nothing separating us from the duke guys.  

Edited May 9, 2023 by teef

[LeviF]

2 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

 

 

Thanks, good to know.  I sit corrected.  But that isn't what's happened here, AFAIK, right?

 

Tbh I don't know if he was even detained. I think you can petition for the same remedy if you are but unless there was some official restriction on his freedom at some point I don't think it applies here.