Matt Araiza

[Augie]

48 minutes ago, Fleezoid said:

I'm confused. What year is it?

 

 

[Beck Water]

 

4 hours ago, phypon said:

 

“I don’t see any elements of force being used in the sexual encounter,” Amador said.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/araiza-not-present-time-alleged-215711086.html

 

https://abcnews.go.com/Sports/witness-matt-araiza-present-time-alleged-rape/story?id=99204260

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/2023/05/09/prosecutor-matt-araiza-not-present-during-alleged-gang-rape

 

Would you be surprised to know that all three of those links you provided can be searched, without finding the phrase you actually quote the DA Amador as saying?  I searched for "Amador" and "force" as well, just to be sure.

 

That's actually....kind of flagrant

 

The phrase "cannot prove forceable sexual assault" was used in the SI link.  There is a legal difference between "cannot prove forceable sexual assault" and "I don't see any elements of force being used in the sexual encounter".   The former means it would not likely meet a criminal court's standard of "proof beyond a reasonable doubt".

[NoSaint]

11 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

To be a bit fair to the actual media, I remember most of the actual reporting on the incident being pretty careful - and I'm fairly sure that if (as the civil suit alleged) I incapacitate you, lead you to the scene of an assault, and throw you down in front of your assaulters I'm legally held to have something to do with their crimes.  Accessory or something.

 

I also remember a number of opinion guys and some local press, as well as (of course) social media absolutely foaming at the mouth, and you're completely correct that they weren't interested in pesky details.

though they loved the lawyer putting out crazy claims allowing them to say “he lawyer alleges….” with all the sensationalism but none of the risk of finding their own headlines 

[boyst]

On 5/9/2023 at 9:24 AM, Gugny said:

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/

 

I want to join a satin club. 

[Augie]

7 minutes ago, boyst said:

I want to join a satin club. 

 

I’m trying to cut back on my Satan stuff as I age. I’m not sure if I’m a better person…….or just very tired.  🤷‍♂️

[boyst]

3 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

I’m trying to cut back on my Satan stuff as I age. I’m not sure if I’m a better person…….or just very tired.  🤷‍♂️

I had a statin once. I rode it often, he was a beautiful black satan

Edited May 11, 2023 by boyst

[Gugny]

2 hours ago, boyst said:

I want to join a satin club. 

Smoooove. 

[phypon]

7 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

 

Would you be surprised to know that all three of those links you provided can be searched, without finding the phrase you actually quote the DA Amador as saying?  I searched for "Amador" and "force" as well, just to be sure.

 

That's actually....kind of flagrant

 

The phrase "cannot prove forceable sexual assault" was used in the SI link.  There is a legal difference between "cannot prove forceable sexual assault" and "I don't see any elements of force being used in the sexual encounter".   The former means it would not likely meet a criminal court's standard of "proof beyond a reasonable doubt".

 

“In looking at the videos on the sex tape, I absolutely cannot prove any forceable sexual assault based upon what happened,” Amador said.

 

“I don’t see any elements of force being used in the sexual encounter,” Amador said.

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/prosecutors-former-bills-punter-matt-araiza-wasnt-present-during-alleged-gang-rape-225211550.html

 

Booth of those quotes are from the above link, which was the first Yahoo link I read.  I thought the yahoo news was a reprint of the yahoo sports and I confused the links.

 

I found the other links that contained other information about MA not being there at the time of the alleged gang activities as well as other quotes from the DA.  There is a pretty good amount of evidence being presented in all of those links.  I don't know how much more evidence you need in order to see that the girl lied and was not raped.  I also don't know why you don't understand the evidence and can't seem to accept the fact that she lied.

Edited May 11, 2023 by phypon

[JoPoy88]

4 hours ago, phypon said:

 

“In looking at the videos on the sex tape, I absolutely cannot prove any forceable sexual assault based upon what happened,” Amador said.

 

“I don’t see any elements of force being used in the sexual encounter,” Amador said.

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/prosecutors-former-bills-punter-matt-araiza-wasnt-present-during-alleged-gang-rape-225211550.html

 

Booth of those quotes are from the above link, which was the first Yahoo link I read.  I thought the yahoo news was a reprint of the yahoo sports and I confused the links.

 

I found the other links that contained other information about MA not being there at the time of the alleged gang activities as well as other quotes from the DA.  There is a pretty good amount of evidence being presented in all of those links.  I don't know how much more evidence you need in order to see that the girl lied and was not raped.  I also don't know why you don't understand the evidence and can't seem to accept the fact that she lied.

All that is true according to the yahoo article and all that is definitely exculpatory. All beck is saying and all I guess have to say is that evidence is not all the evidence in the case. 
 

did some bad **** happen to this woman later on in the night? Possibly yes. Was Araiza involved? Probably no. 

[phypon]

4 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said:

All that is true according to the yahoo article and all that is definitely exculpatory. All beck is saying and all I guess have to say is that evidence is not all the evidence in the case. 
 

did some bad **** happen to this woman later on in the night? Possibly yes. Was Araiza involved? Probably no. 

Well, what's the other evidence in the case then?  What is the other bad **** that possibly happened to this woman later in the night after the falsified gang stuff?  I mean, counting the gang stuff she's already up to having sex with four people in one night.  I haven't read anything about another sexual encounter after the gang stuff.  The video evidence of the gang stuff seems to prove that it was consensual.  Maybe I'm missing something.

[SCBills]

Days have gone by since the Araiza news broke.  Silence from so many prominent Bills influencers and media.

 

Sad to see.

 

Was hoping some of the more visible Bills accounts would step up and help clear the name of a man they helped destroy, but I guess that’s too much to ask.

 

Groups like Bills Mafia Babes, who do some really good things, have forever tarnished their name.   They don’t even have the decency to comment on this after taking a victory lap after this man lost his job. 
 

Kudos to those like Patrick Moran, Rico etc., who have stepped up and commented. 

[Doc]

6 minutes ago, SCBills said:

Days have gone by since the Araiza news broke.  Silence from so many prominent Bills influencers and media.

 

Sad to see.

 

Was hoping some of the more visible Bills accounts would step up and help clear the name of a man they helped destroy, but I guess that’s too much to ask.

 

Groups like Bills Mafia Babes, who do some really good things, have forever tarnished their name.   They don’t even have the decency to comment on this after taking a victory lap after this man lost his job. 
 

Kudos to those like Patrick Moran, Rico etc., who have stepped up and commented. 

 

Not surprising.  No one really wants to admit they were wrong and usually won't do so unless/until their feet are held to the fire.

[Your Brown Eye]

3 hours ago, SCBills said:

Days have gone by since the Araiza news broke.  Silence from so many prominent Bills influencers and media.

 

Sad to see.

 

Was hoping some of the more visible Bills accounts would step up and help clear the name of a man they helped destroy, but I guess that’s too much to ask.

 

Groups like Bills Mafia Babes, who do some really good things, have forever tarnished their name.   They don’t even have the decency to comment on this after taking a victory lap after this man lost his job. 
 

Kudos to those like Patrick Moran, Rico etc., who have stepped up and commented. 

 

Are you really shocked? In today's age, especially with social media, it has become so easy to join the mob mentality and crucify anyone without any repercussions of their own. They won't say anything, they will sit on their high horse and act like they did the right thing. People are spineless when it comes to apologizing. If they had any stones or decency, the Bills Mafia "Babes" would personally fund a go-fund-me account for Araiza and his family in an attempt to apologize, but they won't, I guarantee it.

[QCity]

Both parties speak out.

 

How Matt Araiza, former NFL punter, is trying to clear name after rape accusation

[f0neguy]

I read somewhere that the Bills and/or the league couldn’t put him on the exempt list as he had never been a rostered player (or something like that).

[Beck Water]

31 minutes ago, QCity said:

Both parties speak out.

 

How Matt Araiza, former NFL punter, is trying to clear name after rape accusation

 

Quote

In an interview with USA TODAY Sports, the woman emphasized that she was intoxicated to the point of not being able to consent to sex and that the video clips show only a fraction of what happened that night. She said the videos add up to around 30 seconds out of a sequence that lasted more than 90 minutes. 

“I just don’t think that’s fair at all to look at these short clips that were already way into this assault already happening and make a judgment on that and say that that was consensual,” she said.

 

Quote

Her lawsuit states that her nose, belly button and ear piercings had been pulled out and that she was also bleeding from her *****.

But Amador initially said the sex video clips show her piercings “are all still in.”

“So I don't know who or how or when those would have been removed, but during the videos, all of your piercings are still in,” Amador said.

Amador later acknowledged on the recording she couldn’t see the woman’s belly in the video to determine if the piercing was ripped out.

“That's the worst one,” the woman replied. “It was completely ripped through.· I still have like a hole in it. It completely ripped through.”

 

I don't know if it will go anywhere, but the woman's attorney, Dan Gilleon, is saying he is determined to continue her civil case.  It sounds as though they're kind of asking a pretty token sum, but at the same time, he's shown before he is willing to make a lot of noise.

 

Quote

The woman’s civil lawsuit remains pending against Araiza, Ewaliko and Leonard. She is seeking unspecified damages, and a trial date has been set for October in San Diego. Gilleon, her attorney, confirmed he offered to settle the case with Araiza for $50,000.

 

Quote

His agent said NFL teams fear a public-relations backlash that might come from signing him.

“We didn’t think that these teams would be as discriminatory as they are,” said Linta, Araiza’s agent. “I never thought in a million years that once he was cleared and proved that he did nothing wrong that teams would still be ignorant. That’s really what it is: ignorance.”

 

I completely understand the prosecutor's decision to not file charges because a jury would 100% find "a reasonable doubt" in the evidence the DA cited, but there's apparently a lot of evidence the DA didn't go into.  A civil trial mid-season would be seen as a distraction and potentially embarrassing to a team that signed Araiza.  I can understand why teams would feel they don't want to go there; Araiza's agent's take painting the teams as "ignorant" doesn't seem very constructive and perhaps

 

 

[K-9]

54 minutes ago, Beck Water said:

I don't know if it will go anywhere, but the woman's attorney, Dan Gilleon, is saying he is determined to continue her civil case.  It sounds as though they're kind of asking a pretty token sum, but at the same time, he's shown before he is willing to make a lot of noise.

 

I completely understand the prosecutor's decision to not file charges because a jury would 100% find "a reasonable doubt" in the evidence the DA cited, but there's apparently a lot of evidence the DA didn't go into.  A civil trial mid-season would be seen as a distraction and potentially embarrassing to a team that signed Araiza.  I can understand why teams would feel they don't want to go there; Araiza's agent's take painting the teams as "ignorant" doesn't seem very constructive and perhaps

I doubt any NFL team is ignorant of the still pending civil case and until that’s resolved I doubt any would welcome the distraction in season. The public tend to dismiss civil suits as less serious, but while the bar for the jury to find guilt is lower, the charges filed in them are often very serious, as is the case here. That said, imo her attorney is doing her a great disservice given the DA findings. That will carry weight in the courtroom, regardless.

Edited May 11, 2023 by K-9

[Beck Water]

3 hours ago, f0neguy said:

I read somewhere that the Bills and/or the league couldn’t put him on the exempt list as he had never been a rostered player (or something like that).

 

Not quite.  The CBA prohibits the NFL or teams from taking any action against a player for events which occur before he is signed.

So even if he had been on a roster before, they still couldn't act because the events took place before he was signed (or even drafted).

 

[Beck Water]

2 hours ago, K-9 said:

I doubt any NFL team is ignorant of the still pending civil case and until that’s resolved I doubt any would welcome the distraction in season. The public tend to dismiss civil suits as less serious, but while the bar for the jury to find guilt is lower, the charges filed in them are often very serious, as is the case here. That said, imo her attorney is doing her a great disservice given the DA findings. That will carry weight in the courtroom, regardless.

 

Yeah, I don't know what to think of that.  The USAToday article @QCity linked makes it seem a slam-dunk that Araiza did nothing and the girl was a willing partner for everything that went on that night.  But the girl's attorney makes it seem as though the DA presented a limited, biased set of evidence, and the full picture looks very different.   There are just these little "uh, what?" tidbits, like the DA saying "your piercings were still intact in that video" "um, you can't see her navel area in that video" "oh, yeah, you're right, I can't" and so forth.

 

So I think where we're at is, without the full evidence, the rest of us don't know what's true or not. 

 

I think that is what's giving teams pause, especially since the "slivy tove" lawyer has made it very clear he will try a case in the media. 

 

But if the attorney is mistaken, it would seem Araiza has a pretty sound case against them for defamation or whatever it's called in Cali., with lost earnings and the whole ball of wax.

 

Edited May 12, 2023 by Beck Water

[Arkady Renko]

On 5/9/2023 at 9:24 AM, Gugny said:

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/

 

Yes, they are a bunch of trolls who mock the beliefs of others.