Jump to content

Buffalo Bills punter might be a rapist

Parliament

By Parliament
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

RoyalBevo21

RoyalBevo21 719

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Pam Cummings said:

Literally all you posted was that criminal charges will not be filed. That means absolutely nothing in these cases. Deshaun Watson wasn't charged criminally either but it's pretty clear something happened. Stop making this dude out to be a victim. He made choices and now he's paying for it, same as anyone else.

What very well may have happened is he's an NFL quarterback with loads of money that has sex with willing women that knew they could lie to get some of that money. Not sure if you've ever been around sexual assault victims but that usually really fucks someone up mentally for life. It's definitely not something you can "settle" for a six figure payday. Yet, here we are is so "obvious something happened" if that's true where TF if the overwhelming evidence that should be easy to produce. 

 

It's truly insane that names can be released to the media to parade around and generate revenue on someone that may or may not have committed a crime. If proven guilty, no doubt they should be ashamed and feel the full force of the law. But outside of that it's bullshit it's allowed to happen. We shouldn't operate society like nomads on a witch hunt. And sorry, but if it comes out you're lying about what happened for a money grab you should be charged with perjury and imprisoned. This culture of attacking men on false accusations needs to end. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jkwellborn

Jkwellborn 6653

Posted
Posted
Gee what a surprise, another bullshit accusation where now this person has the stigma for life. Is there every going to be any accountability for these bullshit accusers? It sucks it is so easy to accuse someone of rape and the court of public opinion condemns them right away and that person usually loses their job, sponsorships, etc.
 

So, was it a case of regret sex? I didn’t read everything.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Helobious

Helobious 9480

Posted
Posted
On 12/7/2022 at 6:45 PM, RoyalBevo21 said:

What very well may have happened is he's an NFL quarterback with loads of money that has sex with willing women that knew they could lie to get some of that money. Not sure if you've ever been around sexual assault victims but that usually really fucks someone up mentally for life. It's definitely not something you can "settle" for a six figure payday. Yet, here we are is so "obvious something happened" if that's true where TF if the overwhelming evidence that should be easy to produce. 

 

It’s weird that doesn’t happen to every famous/rich male ever then. Poor Deshaun. I think some men do get falsely accused, and those accusers should absolutely receive consequences. But it’s incredibly naive to read the facts of Deshaun’s case and come away with he never did anything wrong and all 20+ of those women were just out to get him. And fwiw several of his accusers did come forward publicly.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hook1997

Hook1997 5285

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Helobious said:

It’s weird that doesn’t happen to every famous/rich male ever then. Poor Deshaun. I think some men do get falsely accused, and those accusers should absolutely receive consequences. But it’s incredibly naive to read the facts of Deshaun’s case and come away with he never did anything wrong and all 20+ of those women were just out to get him. And fwiw several of his accusers did come forward publicly.

The smart ones have been getting NDA’s signed for years even for one night stands that I’m sure include consent.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27421

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, Helobious said:

It’s weird that doesn’t happen to every famous/rich male ever then. Poor Deshaun. I think some men do get falsely accused, and those accusers should absolutely receive consequences. But it’s incredibly naive to read the facts of Deshaun’s case and come away with he never did anything wrong and all 20+ of those women were just out to get him. And fwiw several of his accusers did come forward publicly.

Dude is rich and famous. He can pay for super hot chicks to do let him do the most depraved shit imaginable to him and no one would ever know. He liked jizzing on unwilling women. Wasn’t about sex but rather power

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
Blotto

Blotto 23432

Posted
Posted

https://sports.yahoo.com/prosecutors-former-bills-punter-matt-araiza-wasnt-present-during-alleged-gang-rape-225211550.html?ncid=twitter_yahoosport_dw14wrbb51g

Quote

The civil lawsuit alleged that soon after the girl’s arrival at the party, she was separated from her friends and Araiza led her “over to the side yard of the house where he told her to perform” sex against her consent.

Araiza, however, has always maintained that he never led her into a private area of the backyard, that she walked back there while he was urinating.

Witness testimony, again including the girl’s friends, played a role in prosecutors declining to press charges.

“The witnesses say … that shortly after you arrived at the party, you left and came back shortly thereafter,” Amador said. “And you told [a friend], ‘I just had sex.’ ... You didn’t appear unhappy. You appeared to be having fun and that the encounter on the side of the house with Matt, suspect Araiza, was consensual."

Amador also explained to the girl that additional witness testimony alleged that at this period of time, “you were approaching men at the party saying, ‘I want you to [expletive] me and if you don’t [expletive] me you’re a [expletive].”

While the civil lawsuit claimed that right after the Araiza encounter in the side yard the football player led her into the bedroom in the house, the timeline established by authorities was much different. Prosecutors said that “shortly after” being with Araiza, witnesses said the girl again left her group and came back to report she had had sex with a different man. Again, prosecutors explained, witnesses suggested it was consensual.

“You had returned and then came back and said you had sex with a guy, this would have been the second person that would have been in the progression of the evening,” Amador said. “Again, you’re described as being OK, not scared or distraught. Seemed happy, seemed consensual.

“Again, you’re not intoxicated at this point that anybody would know your intoxication level to the point that they would not be able to tell that you weren't able to give consent,” Amador said.

This is a pretty fucked up case. Later in the article, it indicates that the prosecutors reviewed several videos of the alleged gang rape later that evening, and saw no reason to believe that episode wasn't consensual either. Dude should be kicking in the NFL next fall, but instead gets to defend himself in a civil case that the prosecutors refused to prosecute as a criminal matter. I'm guessing the 18 yr old "victim"  probably has shit for money, so Araiza probably doesn't have much recourse available to him. Sorry dude, good luck getting back in the NFL. 

  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
52-80

52-80 19086

Posted
Posted
On 12/7/2022 at 11:08 PM, Vic Mackey said:

Lol this is dumb. The mob mentality allows a person to be condemned before one shred of evidence of ever released. This guy has this stigma for life because of mob mentality. In fact, their opinion is more powerful as no one gives a shit if no charges were now filed. Damage already done. How many relationships are ruined because of this. Please enlighten how the legal system did anything to deter from mob mentality here or any other case like this?

 

sorry-tony-hayward.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
B00M

B00M 6280

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is incredible. Now (at least) 2 people’s lives are effectively ruined because of extremely trashy yet consensual sex. Murica

Edited by B00M
I don’t care enough to figure out how many got wrapped up in the gang bang
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
AUS-97HORN

AUS-97HORN 11673

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
On 12/7/2022 at 4:11 PM, Pam Cummings said:

Literally all you posted was that criminal charges will not be filed. That means absolutely nothing in these cases. Deshaun Watson wasn't charged criminally either but it's pretty clear something happened. Stop making this dude out to be a victim. He made choices and now he's paying for it, same as anyone else.

 

15 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

Great, now all the incels are gonna do a victory lap, as if they give a fuck about this guy at all.

its not the incels taking a victory lap, its the folks that understand that sexual assault is a horrible crime, but also understand that the accusation alone shouldnt mean a fucking scarlet letter is emblazoned upon them immediately without some additional evidence other than the victims accusation.  

 

Should he have been suspended until more info came out, absolutely, or better yet put on the Commissioner's List (which means they get paid until convicted or plead out).   But Buffalo had to drop him because the social pressure was becoming enormous (plus he wasnt officially part of the team yet). 

The cops report that everyone jumped on (including you) showed them telling prosecutors that they didnt recommend charges. The investigation was still technically open but nothing was known about it.  

It was only after the civil shakedown lawsuit was filed that this event became known to everyone.   Only to find out in Dec that all charges were dropped- which you so eloquently dismissed by saying: HE MADE CHOICES.

 

yeah, he did, and now the prosecutors released the evidence showing HE LEFT before the possible assault happened. his choice was to NOT be there, oh yeah and there are numerous witnesses saying they heard her clearly announce she was 18 well before any of the events happened.

So the consensual sex that caused her to get tested for the clap while she was 17 is also not really a smoking gun anymore.   She portrayed herself as of legal age, he met her at an off-campus college party.   technically he might have broken the California age of consent law, but she was shown actively pursuing him, and presenting herself as being of legal age. 

 

THIS story- which admittedly is a very rare "other side" 1-2%  of the time story - meaning its clearly false or completely mistaken identity assault allegations, is the stuff that terrifies most of us.  

because for the most part we all want to believe victims when they come forward saying they were assaulted.

 

  • Hook 'Em 9
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hermanator

Hermanator 6939

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

Great, now all the incels are gonna do a victory lap, as if they give a fuck about this guy at all.

 

2 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

 

its not the incels taking a victory lap, its the folks that understand that sexual assault is a horrible crime, but also understand that the accusation alone shouldnt mean a fucking scarlet letter is emblazoned upon them immediately without some additional evidence other than the victims accusation.  

 

Should he have been suspended until more info came out, absolutely, or better yet put on the Commissioner's List (which means they get paid until convicted or plead out).   But Buffalo had to drop him because the social pressure was becoming enormous (plus he wasnt officially part of the team yet). 

The cops report that everyone jumped on (including you) showed them telling prosecutors that they didnt recommend charges. The investigation was still technically open but nothing was known about it.  

It was only after the civil shakedown lawsuit was filed that this event became known to everyone.   Only to find out in Dec that all charges were dropped- which you so eloquently dismissed by saying: HE MADE CHOICES.

 

yeah, he did, and now the prosecutors released the evidence showing HE LEFT before the possible assault happened. his choice was to NOT be there, oh yeah and there are numerous witnesses saying they heard her clearly announce she was 18 well before any of the events happened.

So the consensual sex that caused her to get tested for the clap while she was 17 is also not really a smoking gun anymore.   She portrayed herself as of legal age, he met her at an off-campus college party.   technically he might have broken the California age of consent law, but she was shown actively pursuing him, and presenting herself as being of legal age. 

 

THIS story- which admittedly is a very rare "other side" 1-2%  of the time story - meaning its clearly false or completely mistaken identity assault allegations, is the stuff that terrifies most of us.  

because for the most part we all want to believe victims when they come forward saying they were assaulted.

 

Yeah, you owe an "I was wrong here" it seems to me. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Texas Wahoo

Texas Wahoo 3383

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

yeah, he did, and now the prosecutors released the evidence showing HE LEFT before the possible assault happened. his choice was to NOT be there, oh yeah and there are numerous witnesses saying they heard her clearly announce she was 18 well before any of the events happened.

So the consensual sex that caused her to get tested for the clap while she was 17 is also not really a smoking gun anymore.   She portrayed herself as of legal age, he met her at an off-campus college party.   technically he might have broken the California age of consent law, but she was shown actively pursuing him, and presenting herself as being of legal age. 

I do not know anything about this particular case, but to clarify, statutory rape is a strict liability crime.  If someone is underage, it is totally irrelevant whether she said she was of age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pam Cummings

Pam Cummings 9576

Posted
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, Brothahorn said:
1 hour ago, Pam Cummings said:
Great, now all the incels are gonna do a victory lap, as if they give a fuck about this guy at all.

You sound like the incels arch enemy, the judgemental bitch ass.

Excuse me for believing a footall player raped someone. It's such a rare story. Lmao at the idea that anyone on a message board owes this dude an apology. The Bills might. But again, they were just protecting themselves. Now that he is exonerated, he probably finds work.

Edited by Pam Cummings
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vic Mackey

Vic Mackey 46934

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Pam Cummings said:

Excuse me for believing a footall player raped someone. Lmao at the idea that anyone on a message board owes this dude an apology. The Bills might. But again, they were just protecting themselves. Now that he is exonerated, he probably finds work.

But damage done. The court of public opinion has already ruled. He will carry this forever now. Most people have already moved on and already have their minds made up. Same as the Duke lacrosse team and so many others. It's way too easy to accuse someone of rape/sexual assault and have their lives ruined before even giving the other person a chance to answer to it. That person gets fired and branded with the scarlett letter. Even if found innocent and that person blatantly lied, they have nothing to answer for. While the other person is ruined. There needs to be more done about the accusers being full of shit. Innocent until proven guilty is a myth and only applies in the criminal court. The court of public opinion is much more powerful. This guy's name was drug through the mud constantly. Now, there will be a footnote of an apology when the accusations were bold front page headlines. And all of those who lynched him don't give a shit any longer.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pam Cummings

Pam Cummings 9576

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Vic Mackey said:

But damage done. The court of public opinion has already ruled. He will carry this forever now. Most people have already moved on and already have their minds made up. Same as the Duke lacrosse team and so many others. It's way too easy to accuse someone of rape/sexual assault and have their lives ruined before even giving the other person a chance to answer to it. That person gets fired and branded with the scarlett letter. Even if found innocent and that person blatantly lied, they have nothing to answer for. While the other person is ruined. There needs to be more done about the accusers being full of shit. Innocent until proven guilty is a myth and only applies in the criminal court. The court of public opinion is much more powerful. This guy's name was drug through the mud constantly. Now, there will be a footnote of an apology when the accusations were bold front page headlines. And all of those who lynched him don't give a shit any longer.

Dude in 2 weeks if i mention this dude's name you will have no idea who i am talking about. Too many people getting away with too much shit for this to matter.

  • Fuck You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FartingMonk

FartingMonk 3606

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

Dude in 2 weeks if i mention this dude's name you will have no idea who i am talking about. Too many people getting away with too much shit for this to matter.

So you're saying an innocent man should burn for other people's crimes?  Wow sounds like you might need some self reflection 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blotto

Blotto 23432

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Texas Wahoo said:

I do not know anything about this particular case, but to clarify, statutory rape is a strict liability crime.  If someone is underage, it is totally irrelevant whether she said she was of age.

You sure about that? I'm not a lawyer, so I dont have a clue, but the DA in California seems to interpret the law differently.

Quote

What about statutory rape?

This was a big issue with Araiza last year since he essentially admitted to having sex with a 17-year-old girl. But a suspect is not guilty of this crime if he reasonably believed the woman was 18 or older, according to the law. Araiza said he believed she was 18. Ewaliko and Leonard were 18 at the time of their encounters with her.

“I have to be able to prove that they knew your age,” Amador told her.

Amador said that a witness who was in the house gave a statement saying the woman told people at the party she was 18. Amador also noted that a video from a different party from back then showed the woman saying she was 18, suggesting it would be hard to prove that people should have known she was younger.

Edited to add: "mistake of age" is a defense apparently recognized by some states, including California:

Quote

Statutory rape laws were enacted in the Middle Ages to protect the chastity of young women (Oberman, Statutory Rape Laws, ABA Journal, August 1996). Some commentators believe they reflected the historical perception of women as property in need of special protection (Connerton, The Resurgence of the Marital Rape Exception, 61 Albany Law Review 237 (1997)). Statutory rape laws developed in America through English common law. The age of consent was first set at age 10 and subsequently raised to 18 or 21 (Connerton, p. 252). Statutory rape was a strict liability offense, and it did not matter whether the man thought the girl was of age or not. The courts have generally held that, in the absence of a statute to the contrary, it is no defense that the defendant believed in good faith that the female was above the age of consent or that he was misled by her appearance or her misrepresentations (65 Am Jur 2d 781).

The first successful use of the mistake-of-fact defense in a statutory rape case appears to have occurred in California in 1964 in People v. Hernandez, 393 P2d 673. The California Supreme Court ruled that the defendant's reasonable belief that the girl was 18, which was the age of consent in California at that time, was a defense, since this belief negated any criminal intent. (In fact, the girl in that case was three months less than 18.)

 

Edited by Blotto
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Sgt Hulk

Sgt Hulk 13647

Posted
Posted
On 5/11/2023 at 12:47 PM, Vic Mackey said:

But damage done. The court of public opinion has already ruled. He will carry this forever now. Most people have already moved on and already have their minds made up. Same as the Duke lacrosse team and so many others. It's way too easy to accuse someone of rape/sexual assault and have their lives ruined before even giving the other person a chance to answer to it. That person gets fired and branded with the scarlett letter. Even if found innocent and that person blatantly lied, they have nothing to answer for. While the other person is ruined. There needs to be more done about the accusers being full of shit. Innocent until proven guilty is a myth and only applies in the criminal court. The court of public opinion is much more powerful. This guy's name was drug through the mud constantly. Now, there will be a footnote of an apology when the accusations were bold front page headlines. And all of those who lynched him don't give a shit any longer.

People like pam don’t give shit. They are brain dead dipshit idiots that contribute to innocent until proven guilty holier than thou societal bullshit that Covid should have flushed down the drain. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foosters

Foosters 17730

Posted
Posted
On 5/11/2023 at 9:47 AM, Vic Mackey said:

But damage done. The court of public opinion has already ruled. He will carry this forever now. Most people have already moved on and already have their minds made up. Same as the Duke lacrosse team and so many others. It's way too easy to accuse someone of rape/sexual assault and have their lives ruined before even giving the other person a chance to answer to it. That person gets fired and branded with the scarlett letter. Even if found innocent and that person blatantly lied, they have nothing to answer for. While the other person is ruined. There needs to be more done about the accusers being full of shit. Innocent until proven guilty is a myth and only applies in the criminal court. The court of public opinion is much more powerful. This guy's name was drug through the mud constantly. Now, there will be a footnote of an apology when the accusations were bold front page headlines. And all of those who lynched him don't give a shit any longer.

My issue, and what generally raises my suspicion, is people who act like this only happens to men in the context of sexual assault. 

People from all walks get accused, arrested, jailed, smeared, fired, shamed, etc., all for charges that end up dismissed.

I'm all for having a conversation about major changes to the criminal justice system to prevent this from happening, but I'm not sure that's what going on here.

The people who usually are so up in arms about men getting falsely accused of sexual assault, often don't have a damn thing to say when it comes to the myriad other injustices doled out in the pursuit of justice.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
52-80

52-80 19086

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Foosters said:

My issue, and what generally raises my suspicion, is people who act like this only happens to men in the context of sexual assault. 

People from all walks get accused, arrested, jailed, smeared, fired, shamed, etc., all for charges that end up dismissed.

I'm all for having a conversation about major changes to the criminal justice system to prevent this from happening, but I'm not sure that's what going on here.

The people who usually are so up in arms about men getting falsely accused of sexual assault, often don't have a damn thing to say when it comes to the myriad other injustices doled out in the pursuit of justice.

why not.  why not make this thread about your straw men.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ImissWallyPryor

ImissWallyPryor 9045

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Foosters said:

I'm all for having a conversation about major changes to the criminal justice system to prevent this from happening, but I'm not sure that's what going on here.

For starters, I’m for withholding the name of the accused until they are indicted, especially if it is the type of crime that protects the alleged victim’s identity. I’m not quite there yet, but perhaps not identifying the accused until they are actually convicted, unless the accuser is willing to be identified. 

Edited by ImissWallyPryor
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...
  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...