OT Matt Araiza - Accused Of Rape

[Guest]

So true and OJ was innocent because he was acquitted too…

O.J. was found "not guilty". The jury found that the evidence presented was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that O.J. committed the murders.

The civil jury found that it was more likely than not that O.J. did cause the deaths of Ron and Nicole.

The two verdicts are consistent as there was a lesser burden of proof in the civil case.

This, if course, distinguishes O.J. from the other persons you named as those persons have neither been convicted, nor found liable for anything (again, as far as I am aware).

[Boltjolt]

It's always "let's don't ruin the young man's life for one mistake he made." Never do I hear these guys have any concern about how the young girl's life was ruined. I wrote about my own sister's experience with a situation like this in the WOYM thread. She was 14 and tried to take her own life after it happened. Fortunately, due to her strength, she got through it and has had a good life. But a lot of sexual assault victims - particularly if they are underage - don't recover. So, yeah, I have no sympathy whatsoever for Araiza.

I saw that and sorry it happened. Agree that it can have many bad effects on minors. Some can forget it and move in and some cant. Good for your sister to overcome it.

Some team is bound to sign Araiza down the road depending on how this turns out.

[jamrock]

And the victims aren't always girls. My father molested me for years. At least from 8 years old to 17. That - and a combination of other messed up things (like Mom abandoning me to Dad the molester/hitter when she ran off to another state with a man) - made my life HELL growing up and into adulthood. I don't trust anyone. I'm always in panic mode with so much fear that I just stay inside my apartment all the time. And I'm 59 years old. I don't want anyone's sympathy. But I can back up your assertion that victims don't always recover so well. I'll leave you with this...When my father would molest me he'd smile at me. That was literally the only time he would ever smile at me. It was hell growing up with him for me. At least he's dead now.

That’s a lot of trauma. I’m sorry you had to deal with this and hope you have had the chance to see someone professional about it.

[QSmokey]

Interesting discussion, albeit not really football related, per se. Shows that there are two sides to everything; kind of what makes this country so great and, IMO, problematic at times.

Not sure why criminal chargers weren't filed. Does anyone have information on that? Often, in this day and age, there is that slippery slope of consent, deception, gold-digging, general dishonesty, greed, regret, revenge, shame, public opinion, and a whole host of other feelings/emotions/motivations that make their way into these messy situations.

Did the Bills do the 'right' thing by cutting Araiza? Well, you have to ask: What was their motivation for that? To avoid the media circus surrounding the case? To not have to deal with a major distraction for a team who feels they are poised to make a serious SB run? Because they believe Araiza did what the civil suite said that he did?

My personal opinion, FWIW, is the Bills management/coaches had a meeting and decided that they didn't want to deal with all the 'stuff' coming their way if they kept Araiza and, as someone already said, we're talking about a punter here, not Josh Allen. They can easily be successful without Araiza. Now, if that was their line of thinking - cutting a low-profile player simply because he is a low-profile player - opens up a whole 'nother discussion about this situation.

For me, I wouldn't touch Araiza with a 10-foot pole. Do I believe he did what he has been accused of doing? Honestly, yes. And if I were in a position to make the decision of whether to keep him or not, that would be my motivation for such a decision.

[Hadl2Alworth]

Edited by Fleet

No politics

[Heatmiser]

The criminal investigation is still on going and nearing completion according to news articles. When it is completed it is up to the DA to determine whether to bring charges for statutory rape (which seems pretty clear cut, given that Araiza has all but admitted to it during interactions between the girl and him that were monitored by police) or rape, imprisonment, sexual assault and a bunch of other stuff that Chain would know way better than me.

I think Araiza is done as a pro football player and all signs indicate that is deserved.

TG

[captaind]

I have a different perspective than most on all of this.

First, what has been filed against Araiza is a civil lawsuit. Apparently, there is no criminal action filed or to be filed. That is somewhat telling as it suggests that even with the alleged recording, the district attorney's office did not think the case could be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. While that does not negate the possibility of proof at the lower civil standard of proof (a more likely than not standard), as in the O.J. Simpson case, at a minimum, that suggests the possibility that the "we have you dead and stinking" allegations of paragraph 15 of the complaint regarding the content of the recording may be being overstated by the young woman's attorney.

Yet, it seems that nobody on this forum has even considered the possibility that the complaint, which at best contains the allegations of an admittedly very intoxicated person (which potentially affects her credibility), may be false or at least false as related to Araiza, who would be a good person to name in a lawsuit since he is/was an NFL player (i.e., someone with a comparatively deep pocket).

As someone who responds to complaints and other allegations routinely for a living, it is absolutely the case that just because someone writes something down on a piece of paper, that does not make that something true--even as to what was reportedly recorded as that could be being mischaracterized as well.

I, for one, find it to be a poor move on the part of the Bills that they released Araiza absent an adjudication or solid proof on the matter. The "we are going to let Matt focus on this" is a total cop out by the Bills. There is nothing preventing Araiza from playing football and aiding his attorney in the defense of the case at the same time. This is just the Bills caving to what it perceives as the inevitable wave of PC and cancel culture BS, something that will continue until people stand up to it and say "enough is enough".

Given that Araiza is not facing any NFL discipline, I would not hesitate to sign Araiza. I do not see how giving a man a high paying position that he has earned with his job performance and that enables him to pay a nice settlement to the alleged victim is a bad thing--for anyone. The NFL team wins by getting the player; the player wins by getting a higher paying job; and the alleged victim wins because the player is making an NFL salary instead of working at a local car wash making minimum wage.

And I think I can tell you at least person that privately would agree with me on that subject--and that is the young woman's attorney. As someone that represents plaintiffs regularly, I can tell you that having someone that can actually pay a larger settlement is always helpful to a client that has suffered significant harms and losses. These lawsuits are filed to help the alleged victim, not to destroy the alleged tortfeasor.

Marking my calendar that I actually agree with you on something.

[Fleet 1]

,,,

We dont do politics here.

[Fouts2herbert]

I am sorry, but your agenda driven revisionist history is utter nonsense.

First, this was the sentencing of Bundy and therefore comments about Bundy and the path he took in life were entirely appropriate for such a proceeding.

Second, this judge stated that he independently arrived at and agreed with the recommendation of the jury that Bundy receive the death penalty. So, your post kind of buries the lead of the video that the judge just sentenced Bundy to death.

Third, what the judge said was 100% true. By all accounts, Bundy was a bright law student that had real potential in life. Part of his unfortunate success as a serial killer stemmed from him being bright charming, and very likable, which are desirable traits in life. Everyone could see that in Bundy. So the judge noted that it was a tragedy that such a bright and talented person as Bundy took the path in life that he took because he could have been a good attorney and one that he would have liked to have had practice before him instead of...you know, being a serial killer.

Fourth, I can tell you from years of personal experience as a hearing officer (kind of a quasi-judicial function), that when a younger person does something to throw his/her life away, it does strike you that things did not have to be that way for that person and that the person's life situation really is tragic. It is not an uncommon thought for someone in that role reviewing the events of someone's life that has gone awry to have.

This was the sentencing of Ted Bundy, not the life celebration event for his victims. SMH....

bundy didn’t go around killing drug addicted prostitutes like ridgeway did, he specifically hunted college women and most all of them were beautiful and charming themselves with legit futures ahead of them, the judge might’ve made mention of that when he sentenced bundy but instead he focused on how the world had been deprived of bundy’s brilliance…

[jamrock]

I am sorry, but your agenda driven revisionist history is utter nonsense.

First, this was the sentencing of Bundy and therefore comments about Bundy and the path he took in life were entirely appropriate for such a proceeding.

Second, this judge stated that he independently arrived at and agreed with the recommendation of the jury that Bundy receive the death penalty. So, your post kind of buries the lead of the video that the judge just sentenced Bundy to death.

Third, what the judge said was 100% true. By all accounts, Bundy was a bright law student that had real potential in life. Part of his unfortunate success as a serial killer stemmed from him being bright charming, and very likable, which are desirable traits in life. Everyone could see that in Bundy. So the judge noted that it was a tragedy that such a bright and talented person as Bundy took the path in life that he took because he could have been a good attorney and one that he would have liked to have had practice before him instead of...you know, being a serial killer.

Fourth, I can tell you from years of personal experience as a hearing officer (kind of a quasi-judicial function), that when a younger person does something to throw his/her life away, it does strike you that things did not have to be that way for that person and that the person's life situation really is tragic. It is not an uncommon thought for someone in that role reviewing the events of someone's life that has gone awry to have.

This was the sentencing of Ted Bundy, not the life celebration event for his victims. SMH....

LOL. It’s not like Bundt did one thing to throw his life away. Judge didn’t need to weigh in with his thoughts on the path Buddy could have taken. That’s bullshit and who really needs a lawyer like Ted Bundy? Lawyers have a bad enough reputation as it is

[Fleet 1]

Interesting discussion, albeit not really football related, per se.

Its not very Charger related is more what im thinking. lol Outside of the fact i wanted us to draft him. lol I had no clue of course.

When the season starts week 1 im moving most non bolt threads to our other wonderful forums.

[Guest]

bundy didn’t go around killing drug addicted prostitutes like ridgeway did, he specifically hunted college women and most all of them were beautiful and charming themselves with legit futures ahead of them, the judge might’ve made mention of that when he sentenced bundy but instead he focused on how the world had been deprived of bundy’s brilliance…

Again, the proceeding was not the life celebration event for Bundy's victims. It was the pronouncement of Bundy's sentence. The sentencing was exactly what it was supposed to be and the thoughts that went through the mind of the judge were entirely normal for that type of proceeding.

Your tortured revisionist attempt to turn that proceeding into something else is unimpressive and demonstrates a lack of understanding of both the nature of the proceeding and the meaning of the judge's comments.

The judge was not focusing on the world being deprived of Bundy's brilliance. That is an absolutely lame characterization of what was said. Rather, the judge was telling Bundy that because he had the ability to do so, he could have taken a different path in life and that it was too bad that he chose a different path, one that resulted in the judge sentencing him to death. He chose to kill women instead of being a good lawyer and that was tragic for all involved.

Bundy was the man being sentenced and Bundy was the focus of the proceeding, so discussing Bundy was appropriate no matter what decades later agenda driven revisionist spin you are trying to put on it.

I would also emphasize that the proceeding involved the sentencing of Bundy to death and that I would hope that no judge would conduct that kind of proceeding in a mindless and unreflective fashion. His comments showed careful consideration of the issues and his punishment was the harshest possible under the law for what he did to his victims.