Ya Digg? Posted September 8 Posted September 8 4 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said: What, pray tell, was the right way? Gotta love the hindsight people, right? If Araiza had signed with a team like the Titans, Vikings, Panthers….would this even be a discussion? Quote
gjv Posted September 8 Posted September 8 1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said: What, pray tell, was the right way? The prey tell is, Do what they said they were going to do. They told Matt to go take care of his problem. He did, and they didn't bring him back. 1 1 Quote
SoMAn Posted September 8 Posted September 8 On 9/6/2024 at 5:37 PM, Fleezoid said: Which is perpetuated by social media. It creates a mob mentality with its virtual torches and pitchforks. That would have played out differently without that crap. Perpetuated equally or more by main stream media who spark the fire and continue to fan the flames for their own benefit until it dies out. Rarely a word following exoneration. It doesn’t sell. Quote
Mr. WEO Posted September 8 Posted September 8 21 hours ago, T master said: With all the family talk that surrounds the Bills i was surprised that they immediately cut him with little to no chance of him being able to give his side of the story or to prove his innocence . I think in some respects he probably went with the Chiefs just to piss off the Bills for not in some kind of way sticking up for him or believing in him . It's now all water under the bridge i just hope he isn't a ingredient in a loss for the Bills that would keep them from beating the Chiefs in the play offs, now that would really suck !! his side of the story was “I was tricked into committing statutory rape”. they heard that and let him go. What’s the hard part of this? Quote
Doc Posted September 8 Posted September 8 27 minutes ago, gjv said: The prey tell is, Do what they said they were going to do. They told Matt to go take care of his problem. He did, and they didn't bring him back. You're assuming he wanted to come back. If given the choice, who would you rather play for: the SB champs or anyone else, much less the team that drafted you and got to know you but didn't believe you were innocent and cut you? Once those shysters went public with the claims of statutory rape, on the even of the season, it was over for Araiza and the Bills. Quote
Jerome007 Posted September 8 Posted September 8 On 9/6/2024 at 5:52 PM, MJS said: He punted one into the end zone that he shouldn't have. I really am glad he is finally having a NFL career! It should have been with the Bills and from day 1. But this. His punt was too long. But when it's from that far away, a touchback is not bad IMO. If he does that with shorter punts though then it's an issue. Quote
gjv Posted September 8 Posted September 8 1 hour ago, Doc said: You're assuming he wanted to come back. If given the choice, who would you rather play for: the SB champs or anyone else, much less the team that drafted you and got to know you but didn't believe you were innocent and cut you? Once those shysters went public with the claims of statutory rape, on the even of the season, it was over for Araiza and the Bills. I'm not asuming anything, nor am I trying to read Matts mind. The Bills didn't have to cut him. 1 Quote
Doc Posted September 8 Posted September 8 10 minutes ago, gjv said: I'm not asuming anything, nor am I trying to read Matts mind. The Bills didn't have to cut him. They did. The outcry was insane. Even now after the truth has come out, many people still think he's a statutory rapist. Quote
gjv Posted September 8 Posted September 8 4 minutes ago, Doc said: They did. The outcry was insane. Even now after the truth has come out, many people still think he's a statutory rapist. The outcry was not insane. Your grabbing for straws to justify a mistake made by the Bills brass. Quote
Doc Posted September 8 Posted September 8 24 minutes ago, gjv said: The outcry was not insane. Your grabbing for straws to justify a mistake made by the Bills brass. Yeah, it was. When you have team leaders like Mitch Morse saying that it’s hard to hear those allegations, you know that it’s hitting more than just the public. Quote
gjv Posted September 8 Posted September 8 2 minutes ago, Doc said: Yeah, it was. When you have team leaders like Mitch Morse saying that it’s hard to hear those allegations, you know that it’s hitting more than just the public. WOW! that a real insane outcry. By the way, had it been a first round pick in Matts shoes intead of a 6th round pick do you think the outcome would have been the same? Quote
Doc Posted September 8 Posted September 8 11 minutes ago, gjv said: WOW! that a real insane outcry. By the way, had it been a first round pick in Matts shoes intead of a 6th round pick do you think the outcome would have been the same? No, of course not. And he’s just a punter. They rarely get taken before the fifth round anyway. That doesn’t mean that they didn’t do the right thing, or at least, didn’t do the wrong thing. Quote
gjv Posted September 8 Posted September 8 27 minutes ago, Doc said: No, of course not. And he’s just a punter. They rarely get taken before the fifth round anyway. That doesn’t mean that they didn’t do the right thing, or at least, didn’t do the wrong thing. Not sure what you said. Did you say they dumped him because he was just a punter. And if it was a 1st round pick they would have done things differently. Quote
Doc Posted September 8 Posted September 8 6 minutes ago, gjv said: Not sure what you said. Did you say they dumped him because he was just a punter. And if it was a 1st round pick they would have done things differently. Yes. It wasn't worth keeping him around. Quote
T master Posted September 8 Posted September 8 10 hours ago, Mr. WEO said: his side of the story was “I was tricked into committing statutory rape”. they heard that and let him go. What’s the hard part of this? So where did you here that, i never heard that said in any of the talks surrounding his situation. If that was what happened and he by what you said basically admitted doing something wrong then why wasn't he put in jail ? From anything i heard is that he was exonerated of any wrong doing that's why he's back playing if he wan't the NFL probably wouldn't allow him back & if he did do that he would have to sit out a certain amount of games and he's not . Quote
Doc Posted September 9 Posted September 9 52 minutes ago, T master said: So where did you here that, i never heard that said in any of the talks surrounding his situation. If that was what happened and he by what you said basically admitted doing something wrong then why wasn't he put in jail ? From anything i heard is that he was exonerated of any wrong doing that's why he's back playing if he wan't the NFL probably wouldn't allow him back & if he did do that he would have to sit out a certain amount of games and he's not . He didn't. It's his interpretation of Araiza's defense. 1 Quote
Mr. WEO Posted September 9 Posted September 9 11 hours ago, T master said: So where did you here that, i never heard that said in any of the talks surrounding his situation. If that was what happened and he by what you said basically admitted doing something wrong then why wasn't he put in jail ? From anything i heard is that he was exonerated of any wrong doing that's why he's back playing if he wan't the NFL probably wouldn't allow him back & if he did do that he would have to sit out a certain amount of games and he's not . He was exonerated for the "gang rape" charges. see below. 10 hours ago, Doc said: He didn't. It's his interpretation of Araiza's defense. MY "interpretation"??... lol, good one doc. As you well know, He had sex with an underaged girl by California law. He said she lied about her age. That is his defense against statutory rape in the State of California--it allows for a mistake of age defense. It's a technicality he used to avoid criminal charges for an illegal act that he actually committed. 1 Quote
Doc Posted September 9 Posted September 9 1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said: MY "interpretation"??... lol, good one doc. As you well know, He had sex with an underaged girl by California law. He said she lied about her age. That is his defense against statutory rape in the State of California--it allows for a mistake of age defense. It's a technicality he used to avoid criminal charges for an illegal act that he actually committed. There was no crime. Hence no charges, much less conviction. No one "tricked" her into going to a college party, lying about her age and demanding sex from guys. It was just another 5 guys to add to her "body count." Quote
Mr. WEO Posted September 9 Posted September 9 1 minute ago, Doc said: There was no crime. Hence no charges, much less conviction. No one "tricked" her into going to a college party, lying about her age and demanding sex from guys. It was just another 5 guys to add to her "body count." He wasn't charged for raping an underage girl (a crime) only because of his mistake of age claim, backed by evidence. You already know this. In a state without mistake of age defense, he gets charged for a crime, no matter her body count. Simple. Quote
Doc Posted September 9 Posted September 9 (edited) 1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said: He wasn't charged for raping an underage girl (a crime) only because of his mistake of age claim, backed by evidence. You already know this. In a state without mistake of age defense, he gets charged for a crime, no matter her body count. Simple. Doubtful. In 40 states in the country, like NYS, 17 is legal and we never would have even known about this incident. In several of the states where the age of consent is 18, there exist exceptions for mistake in age or close in age ("Romeo and Juliet"), likely because the age of consent is so high. He was in (his home state of) California where mistake in age is a valid defense, so... Bottom line, the law wasn't mean to protect someone like her. Just because she's 17 doesn't mean she gets excused for her actions. Edited September 9 by Doc Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.