Matt Araiza is Suing Woman who Falsely Accused him

[QCity]

17 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

I don't know what the girl testified or didn't testify about being inside the house... maybe you do?

 

If so, can you tell us whether there was alcohol involved?

 

Who furnished the alcohol?

 

Was the girl in a clear state of mind?

 

Is there no question that she was confused about the events?

 

Is it not possible that the 17-18 year old girl was coerced into legal action by her parents?

 

Can you tell us whether the girl hired the lawyer or did her parents do that?

 

If you know the answers to these questions it would possibly be enough to start forming an opinion as to who's at fault and who the victims are.

 

One thing we agree on is that her name will be dragged through the mud. Within the community it's probably no secret who the girl is anyways so she'll live with that for the rest of her life regardless of any further litigation. 

 

 

Can you tell us whether there was alcohol involved when you made this post?

[Gugny]

28 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

I don't know what the girl testified or didn't testify about being inside the house... maybe you do?

 

If so, can you tell us whether there was alcohol involved?

 

Who furnished the alcohol?

 

Was the girl in a clear state of mind?

 

Is there no question that she was confused about the events?

 

Is it not possible that the 17-18 year old girl was coerced into legal action by her parents?

 

Can you tell us whether the girl hired the lawyer or did her parents do that?

 

If you know the answers to these questions it would possibly be enough to start forming an opinion as to who's at fault and who the victims are.

 

One thing we agree on is that her name will be dragged through the mud. Within the community it's probably no secret who the girl is anyways so she'll live with that for the rest of her life regardless of any further litigation. 

 

My ex-wife used to ask me rapid fire questions like this. 
 

That’s the main reason she’s my EX-wife. 
 

[Sierra Foothills]

41 minutes ago, QCity said:

 

Can you tell us whether there was alcohol involved when you made this post?

 

Possibly... I hit the bottle pretty hard last night. I can't swear that I didn't have a BAC at the time of the earlier posts.

 

30 minutes ago, Gugny said:

My ex-wife used to ask me rapid fire questions like this. 
 

That’s the main reason she’s my EX-wife. 
 

 

Because... your answers were unsatisfactory?

 

[Doc]

1 hour ago, Sierra Foothills said:

I don't know what the girl testified or didn't testify about being inside the house... maybe you do?

 

If so, can you tell us whether there was alcohol involved?

 

Who furnished the alcohol?

 

Was the girl in a clear state of mind?

 

Is there no question that she was confused about the events?

 

Is it not possible that the 17-18 year old girl was coerced into legal action by her parents?

 

Can you tell us whether the girl hired the lawyer or did her parents do that?

 

If you know the answers to these questions it would possibly be enough to start forming an opinion as to who's at fault and who the victims are.

 

One thing we agree on is that her name will be dragged through the mud. Within the community it's probably no secret who the girl is anyways so she'll live with that for the rest of her life regardless of any further litigation.

 

Her testimony is worthless because she's lied repeatedly and stated herself that she couldn't remember much of the gang rape.  There were about a dozen videos taken of her trysts with 5 more guys inside the house, but as the ADA who reviewed them said, there was no evidence a) she was incapacitated, b) in distress/being raped and c) Araiza was present.  So alcohol and who supplied it is immaterial.  She's now over 18 and an adult and can tell the truth at any time and end this charade.  So while she may have been a victim in the beginning, that's no longer an excuse.

 

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

yes we all know that the NGL excuses bad behavior…from top talent at vital positions.  Punter is never on that list.

 

I don’t hope anything either way (stop projecting!).  I’m just trying to get you to give a straight answer. You won’t acknowledge even the possibility that something may come out that may turn off a FO

 

Yeah, bad behavior that leads to an arrest and/or charges.  There weren't even charges so that means the behavior wasn't bad.  Mere allegations which get proven false are meaningless and only make those who jumped to conclusions early look silly and unable to say much except "I got it wrong."

 

And I already said there's a slim chance something bad comes out.  Wake me when it happens.  If it happens, as she and her lawyer would be idiots to continue with the trial, hoping against hope that by some miracle a smoking gun magically appears, while in the meantime showing the world her case was a complete lie and her actions that night via video and witness testimony.

Edited July 31, 2023 by Doc

[CoudyBills]

6 hours ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

Really a great post and what I was also trying to express. And the "reverse your field" rush to judgement IS revealing.

 

 

Thank you for that clarification. I was not aware of that. But even for those who "know" all the facts of the case, it's still a leap to make a moral judgement.

 

 

Thank you and Amen.

 

 

Exactly. For instance what was her parents' role in all of this? Isn't it likely that THEY and not SHE, hired the scumbag lawyer. Isn't it more likely than merely possible that they pushed for charges to be pressed?

 

 

I'm glad you're so certain of your understanding of this situation.

 

As for your first sentence, I originally asked whether the Bills could suspend him in order to not deny him due process.

 

As for others I find that those who rush to judgement initially are often the same ones who overcorrect in the other direction. It's the same pendulum swinging the opposite way so I don't agree with your characterization.

 

 

 

She ruined another person's life? Isn't this a bit premature?

 

Also how is she going to live this down for the rest of her life? Is not her life just as ruined?

 

There seems to be this binary blame mentality that I disagree with. IMO there's both plenty of blame to go around as well as more than one victim in this sad tale.

 

 

Your response is inferior to @Udubalum07's.

 

Not everyone knows all the details so you don't have to flavor your post with snarky know-it-allness.

 

 

 

Pot meet kettle

[NoSaint]

54 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

Possibly... I hit the bottle pretty hard last night. I can't swear that I didn't have a BAC at the time of the earlier posts.

 

 

Because... your answers were unsatisfactory?

 

this actually might be your ex wife, eh?!?

[Augie]

11 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

this actually might be your ex wife, eh?!?

 

Speaking of BAC and ex-wives, a buddy was in the wedding for his UGA classmate a few years ago. My buddy is pretty “fun”, so I’m sure his buddies were the same. Or worse. 

 

The groom got a DUI in Athens going three blocks from the reception to the hotel. LORDY!!!  😱

[Mr. WEO]

39 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Her testimony is worthless because she's lied repeatedly and stated herself that she couldn't remember much of the gang rape.  There were about a dozen videos taken of her trysts with 5 more guys inside the house, but as the ADA who reviewed them said, there was no evidence a) she was incapacitated, b) in distress/being raped and c) Araiza was present.  So alcohol and who supplied it is immaterial.  She's now over 18 and an adult and can tell the truth at any time and end this charade.  So while she may have been a victim in the beginning, that's no longer an excuse.

 

 

Yeah, bad behavior that leads to an arrest and/or charges.  There weren't even charges so that means the behavior wasn't bad.  Mere allegations which get proven false are meaningless and only make those who jumped to conclusions early look silly and unable to say much except "I got it wrong."

 

And I already said there's a slim chance something bad comes out.  Wake me when it happens.  If it happens, as she and her lawyer would be idiots to continue with the trial, hoping against hope that by some miracle a smoking gun magically appears, while in the meantime showing the world her case was a complete lie and her actions that night via video and witness testimony.

 

Only charged crimes are now bad behavior?  This is an interesting new concept!  

 

What were the charges brought against Watson?

 

I don't see any "smoking gun" coming to light.  But that's not what I was asking about. It was what level of detail about this kid and his particular choices are owners going to be comfortable about being attached to this signing.  What's their threshold?

 

Any, I guess we'll see.

[phypon]

3 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

Speaking of BAC and ex-wives, a buddy was in the wedding for his UGA classmate a few years ago. My buddy is pretty “fun”, so I’m sure his buddies were the same. Or worse. 

 

The groom got a DUI in Athens going three blocks from the reception to the hotel. LORDY!!!  😱

NSFW!

 

 

3 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Only charged crimes are now bad behavior?  This is an interesting new concept!  

 

What were the charges brought against Watson?

 

I don't see any "smoking gun" coming to light.  But that's not what I was asking about. It was what level of detail about this kid and his particular choices are owners going to be comfortable about being attached to this signing.  What's their threshold?

 

Any, I guess we'll see.

WEO, give it a rest already.  Sheesh!

[Mr. WEO]

2 minutes ago, phypon said:

NSFW!

 

 

WEO, give it a rest already.  Sheesh!

 

Let the grown ups talk.  

[phypon]

6 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Let the grown ups talk.  

Smoke another joint WEO, we all love you!

[Doc]

11 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Only charged crimes are now bad behavior?  This is an interesting new concept!  

 

What were the charges brought against Watson?

 

I don't see any "smoking gun" coming to light.  But that's not what I was asking about. It was what level of detail about this kid and his particular choices are owners going to be comfortable about being attached to this signing.  What's their threshold?

 

Any, I guess we'll see.

 

Watson settled with his scores of accusers.  It's probably why Araiza says he will never settle with her.  And despite the national publicity over this case and the chance for other women to come forward, to date there is only one accuser, whose story has been shredded to bits.

 

His choice...to have sex with a girl?  If that makes owners uncomfortable...

 

Again as I said, he's preparing for the civil trial because, as you said, Gilleon is going to grill him.  That's a distraction that no team wants to take on right now.

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, Doc said:

 

Watson settled with his scores of accusers.  It's probably why Araiza says he will never settle with her.  And despite the national publicity over this case and the chance for other women to come forward, to date there is only one accuser, whose story has been shredded to bits.

 

His choice...to have sex with a girl?  If that makes owners uncomfortable...

 

Again as I said, he's preparing for the civil trial because, as you said, Gilleon is going to grill him.  That's a distraction that no team wants to take on right now.

 

Why did Watson settle if he did not engage in bad behavior?

[phypon]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Why did Watson settle if he did not engage in bad behavior?

You should ask Watson (not the IBM Watson).  Two different cases.  MA has been proven innocent.  Why do you want him to be guilty so badly??

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, phypon said:

You should ask Watson (not the IBM Watson).  Two different cases.  MA has been proven innocent.  Why do you want him to be guilty so badly??

 

I have said nothing close to that.   I'm asking simple questions.

 

But since you stumbled into the room, where was Araiza "proven innocent"?  He wasn't charged.  He may, as a result of trial, be proven innocent, but he really hasn't yet.  

 

doc said only charged crimes are bad behavior.  is that your view too? If so, then you also would have to agree that Watson should not have paid any of his accusers.

[Doc]

6 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Why did Watson settle if he did not engage in bad behavior?

 

He did.  That's why he settled.  And then got suspended for it.

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

He did.  That's why he settled.  And then got suspended for it.

 

 

Ohh, got it.  So the comment below was just more jesting...

 

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

There weren't even charges so that means the behavior wasn't bad. 

 

[phypon]

2 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

I have said nothing close to that.   I'm asking simple questions.

 

But since you stumbled into the room, where was Araiza "proven innocent"?  He wasn't charged.  He may, as a result of trial, be proven innocent, but he really hasn't yet.  

 

doc said only charged crimes are bad behavior.  is that your view too? If so, then you also would have to agree that Watson should not have paid any of his accusers.

Why are you asking the question?  What is your issue?  He wasn't charged, where was he "proven guilty"?  Where is the "bad behavior"?  You really are making no sense.  Two people had consensual sex.  One person lied about it.  What's your deal, man?

[Doc]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

Ohh, got it.  So the comment below was just more jesting...

 

No it was specific to Araiza's case.  No charges much less a conviction.  Settling was off the table almost a year ago.

 

9 minutes ago, phypon said:

Why are you asking the question?  What is your issue?  He wasn't charged, where was he "proven guilty"?  Where is the "bad behavior"?  You really are making no sense.  Two people had consensual sex.  One person lied about it.  What's your deal, man?

 

He went all-in with Araiza being guilty and can't admit that he was wrong (again).

[Mr. WEO]

3 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

No it was specific to Araiza's case.  No charges much less a conviction.  Settling was off the table almost a year ago.

 

 

He went all-in with Araiza being guilty and can't admit that he was wrong (again).

 

 

link? lol

13 minutes ago, phypon said:

Why are you asking the question?  What is your issue?  He wasn't charged, where was he "proven guilty"?  Where is the "bad behavior"?  You really are making no sense.  Two people had consensual sex.  One person lied about it.  What's your deal, man?

 

I have never said he has been proven guilty--why make attack such an odd straw man?

 

One is found guilty or not guilty (or, in this case liable or not) in court.  That's not what you said---"proven innocent" was what you said.   Where did that occur?