Former Buffalo Bills punter Matt Araiza and former teammates on the San Diego State football team will not face criminal charges in connection with an alleged gang rape of a minor that occurred at an off-campus party in October 2021, the San Diego County District Attorney's Office announced Wednesday.
"Ultimately, prosecutors determined it is clear the evidence does not support the filing of criminal charges and there is no path to a potential criminal conviction," the district attorney's office said in a statement. "Prosecutors can only file charges when they ethically believe they can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt."
The DA's office said the San Diego Police Department did not recommend charges be filed when the case was submitted in early August. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RedinTexas:
I understand your point about using the standard of innocent until proven guilty. That standard exists for the government though, and prevents them from taking away anyone's life, liberty, or property without due process of law. However, you and I are free to form our own opinions. For example, I believe that OJ Simpson was guilty of murdering Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. I believe a majority of the people would agree with me on that. However, the jury found him not guilty. Therefore the government cannot punish OJ for that crime, but you and I are perfectly free to believe whatever we want about his "innocence."
And I definitely see your perspective as well and I don't necessarily disagree with you. The example you gave is a good one. Also, I certainly am not rallying "for" Araiza in this particular case. I have not taken a dive into the details available or researched this case in the way it seems some here have. Araiza may be a huge POS, I don't know. If he did commit this crime, I hope more evidence does present itself and he can go rot in a cage for a few decades. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Why Not?:
And I definitely see your perspective as well and I don't necessarily disagree with you. The example you gave is a good one. Also, I certainly am not rallying "for" Araiza in this particular case. I have not taken a dive into the details available or researched this case in the way it seems some here have. Araiza may be a huge POS, I don't know. If he did commit this crime, I hope more evidence does present itself and he can go rot in a cage for a few decades.
I haven't followed this case at all, I have to admit. So basically the general consensus seems to be that despite the charges being dropped, he's definitely guilty anyways.
On the other end of the spectrum, we do also have many people who will plead guilty while being innocent, mainly for reasons not being able to afford a proper defense and pleading guilty means a lesser penalty. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower:
Seems like a pretty open and shut case for statutory considering he admitted to it.
And the fact she was recorded lying about her age which never is considered a valid defense against statutory rape to boot.
I think it's too late for him to be charged since technically that can be a misdemeanor or felony. Hence, the initial investigation being a farce to cover for the football team and why she went the civil route. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Superturtle: :-) Deadass thought this was a parody. No, they actually are in the video. Yeah, pretty obvious she's blitzed. Also lying about her age.
How one believes a chick with braces is 18 without bothering to check an ID is beyond me.
Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower:
How one believes a chick with braces is 18 without bothering to check an ID is beyond me.
Then again, I was never a D1 athlete.
As absolutely ridiculous as it may seem, I know a woman that got braces at age 56. No joke. It was my former boss' wife.
I can't say I wouldn't have agreed with you before but having seen her get them at that age, I'd have to say it's entirely within the realm of possibility for an 18/19-year-old to do the same. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wallcrawler:
What kind of fence riding shit is this?
Evidence does not support the story that was given. Ergo, he is innocent of the accusations in the story until proven guilty.
Since there were no charges, based on no evidence, I'd say that leans toward **** off I didn't do this thing I'm being accused of.
But like I said, no matter what actually happened, he's guilty already with certain people.
Your post is proof of concept.
We are increasingly living in a society where any accusation will ruin anyone's career. Now sometimes where there is smoke where there is fire but I dont think employers should be able to fire somebody just because they are charged. They SHOULD have to be convicted or take a plea before they are allowed to take action. I realize thst is not the world we live in but this is the entire reason we have a justice system.
Also contrary to popular belief the age of consent in almost every state is not 18. In this case the accuser was 17. 21 vs 17 is rarely a statutory case in most states, which should make sense to anyone who was that age before. [Reply]
