Gareon Conley accused of sexual assault (edit)

[Superman]

1 minute ago, DougDew said:

Why?  If he didn't ask her into the bathroom or wasn't lying on the bed why not say so?

 

What he's saying thus far is that he didn't commit a crime, which tends to imply something happened, maybe even a disagreement over sex, but it didn't elevate to criminal level.  It seems very weak.

 

Because you defend yourself in court, not in the media. And you let your attorney(s) determine the best way to do, with the primary objective being staying out of jail. 

 

If the rape kit invalidates her story, he'll basically be home free. If it invalidates his story, he'll likely wind up on trial. His point by point rebuttal on the Internet could be used against him to weaken his defense. If he has an attorney already -- and he should -- his attorney probably didn't want him to publish this statement. They absolutely would not allow him to try himself on the Internet. I'm not an attorney, I don't even play one on the Internet, but if my client did that, I'd drop him like third period French and wish him luck.

[OffensivelyPC]

5 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Because you defend yourself in court, not in the media. And you let your attorney(s) determine the best way to do, with the primary objective being staying out of jail. 

 

If the rape kit invalidates her story, he'll basically be home free. If it invalidates his story, he'll likely wind up on trial. His point by point rebuttal on the Internet could be used against him to weaken his defense. If he has an attorney already -- and he should -- his attorney probably didn't want him to publish this statement. They absolutely would not allow him to try himself on the Internet. I'm not an attorney, I don't even play one on the Internet, but if my client did that, I'd drop him like third period French and wish him luck.

It would make it a lot more difficult to defend him - particularly because he doesn't know the results of the rape kit.  You don't want to be cornered into defending or explaining something legally because of a public response made pre-legal proceedings.  Any prosecuting attorney worth the paper his degree was put on would absolutely attempt to admit those statements into trial.  Whether or not they did or didn't is debatable, but any juror who knew of it or found out about it at trial would not be able to forget them.  The judge instructs not to consider anything not admitted in trial, but you can't exactly force people not to look at stuff on the internet, much less forget about it.

[NFLfan]

10 hours ago, DougDew said:

Nothing directly at Conley AFAIK.  Its part of a longer conversation spanning a few threads that drifts into bigger issues.  I'm done with it here.

 

Thank you.

[Superman]

23 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

True. I still don't think he gets drafted. By drafting him you're essentially saying you're on his side instead of remaining neutral. That's why teams didn't draft Collins.

 

There were a lot of issues at play when the Collins situation happened. The league was still dealing with the Rice/Peterson/Hardy fallout, and now you have a guy who might be connected with the murder of a pregnant woman (and within a couple days, the unborn baby). And the whole thing happened, not came to light, but actually happened, just a few days before the draft. There was no information, the police had only just begun their investigation, and now they want to talk to him. He wasn't even a suspect, but the whole story was too new to determine what might or might not happen.

 

By the time the draft started, it was becoming clear that he wasn't involved. The risk was still too high, but by the second or third day of the draft, teams were willing to pull the trigger, and several teams were going to. His agents stalled them out. I don't think we know which teams said they were going to draft him on Day 3, but his agents say they successfully bluffed their way all the way out of the draft so he could be a UDFA. 

 

I think teams wanted some level of confidence that he was not going to be charged, and they didn't have that on Day 1. Afterward, they were all in on him. So I don't think they were passing on him because they wanted to remain neutral. 

 

In Conley's case, that may very well happen.

[DougDew]

28 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Because you defend yourself in court, not in the media. And you let your attorney(s) determine the best way to do, with the primary objective being staying out of jail. 

 

If the rape kit invalidates her story, he'll basically be home free. If it invalidates his story, he'll likely wind up on trial. His point by point rebuttal on the Internet could be used against him to weaken his defense. If he has an attorney already -- and he should -- his attorney probably didn't want him to publish this statement. They absolutely would not allow him to try himself on the Internet. I'm not an attorney, I don't even play one on the Internet, but if my client did that, I'd drop him like third period French and wish him luck.

I understand your point, but I think through his attorney could deny her main point pretty clearly.  

 

If they weren't in the bathroom together at all, I don't see why he can't simply say that.  How else do two people get into a hotel bathroom together unless its via invitation.....she broke in?   Its a pretty simple and clear denial if they weren't in the bathroom together, I would think.  And a problem for him if they were....barring the DNA results. 

 

[krunk]

34 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

True. I still don't think he gets drafted. By drafting him you're essentially saying you're on his side instead of remaining neutral. That's why teams didn't draft Collins.

I just thought it was interesting he and his lawyer chose to use the words "I did not committ a crime".  You know they think this stuff out before they write it.  You figure if he was completely innocent they would say  "I did not have sex with this woman" or something like that.  I'm thinking it will come out that he did have sex with her.  That's my hunch.

[Defjamz26]

45 minutes ago, krunk said:

I just thought it was interesting he and his lawyer chose to use the words "I did not committ a crime".  You know they think this stuff out before they write it.  You figure if he was completely innocent they would say  "I did not have sex with this woman" or something like that.  I'm thinking it will come out that he did have sex with her.  That's my hunch.

Kind of what I thought too. Plus if his friends were "busy" in the bathroom, I doubt their statements that nothing happened can be taken seriously.

 

But my big thing is the rape kit. Why have a rape kit done if they didn't even have sex? Are we to assume this girl lied about rape in a room with witnesses and then had a pointless rape kit done. Plus O have no doubt the polo took the sheets off the bed to test for fluids. There's more to this story that meets the eye, IMO but I'm not pointing guilt in either direction.

 

 I think if it turns out they did at least have sex, that's enough for him to not get drafted. For one that'll mean he lied about what originally happened, and then them having sex is enough for them to make this a case. And no one is drafting a kid with a rape case. Bottom line is that this isn't going away in a day and he shouldn't be on any boards. There are worse things that could happen than Conley going undrafted if proven innocent afterwards. It's not the end of the world.

[BOTT]

17 hours ago, Shive said:

Let's say he's found guilty? The Colts are the team that drafted a rapist, which would be a PR nightmare and a wasted pick. If you're only looking at on-field talent, your approach is perfect. In reality, you're negating everything else: PR backlash, potentially wasted draft pick, chemistry issues in the locker room, etc.

I don't think he will get drafted, and I understand why.  But I think people overstate the whole PR backlash thing.  We all love the nfl and the draft.....99% of the population has never heard of the kid.

[krunk]

20 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Kind of what I thought too. Plus if his friends were "busy" in the bathroom, I doubt their statements that nothing happened can be taken seriously.

 

But my big thing is the rape kit. Why have a rape kit done if they didn't even have sex? Are we to assume this girl lied about rape in a room with witnesses and then had a pointless rape kit done. Plus O have no doubt the polo took the sheets off the bed to test for fluids. There's more to this story that meets the eye, IMO but I'm not pointing guilt in either direction.

 

 I think if it turns out they did at least have sex, that's enough for him to not get drafted. For one that'll mean he lied about what originally happened, and then them having sex is enough for them to make this a case. And no one is drafting a kid with a rape case. Bottom line is that this isn't going away in a day and he shouldn't be on any boards. There are worse things that could happen than Conley going undrafted if proven innocent afterwards. It's not the end of the world.

 

I don't know that him actually having sex with her constitutes a lie because his Official Statement, the one that comes directly from him says "I did not committ a crime".  It's not a crime to have sex.  Any other testimony i've seen on the internet with him or somebody else saying he didn't have sex with her comes from hear say from what i've gathered.  What he has officially said is "I did not committ a crime".   I think they chose this wording because somebody in that camp knows they had sex, so if he said "I didn't have sex with her" and the rape kit shows his body fluids in her body then he's automatically a liar.  If you say "I did not committ a crime" then you only have to defend that statement if the rape kit shows his body fluids in her body.

[SaturdayAllDay]

14 minutes ago, BOTT said:

I don't think he will get drafted, and I understand why.  But I think people overstate the whole PR backlash thing.  We all love the nfl and the draft.....99% of the population has never heard of the kid.

I think thats where your issue may come up. Some website will just post a story that says "Colts draft alleged rapist". People who know nothing about the case will just assume he is guilty, and will cause PR issues by that alone. I think that its the uninformed people making knee jerk reactions to a headline that will cause the most PR issues. 

[our_dbs_rock]

So, we have Conley saying he 'didn't commit a crime', instead of 'nothing happened'.  But according to the police reports that TMZ reported on, the witnesses said that nothing happened to the police and she was just mad she got kicked out.  If the DNA matches, then that will make things even more interesting.  You then have to question the witness statements, if they did in fact tell the cops nothing happened.  And if the witness statements are thrown out, you then have his word against hers.  But the funny thing is, he left before the policed arrived and took weeks to give an official statement.  It will be months before this is all worked out.

[Shive]

27 minutes ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

I think thats where your issue may come up. Some website will just post a story that says "Colts draft alleged rapist". People who know nothing about the case will just assume he is guilty, and will cause PR issues by that alone. I think that its the uninformed people making knee jerk reactions to a headline that will cause the most PR issues. 

I was about to reply with the exact response. The media loves to make the headlines as damning as they can and the uninformed would lose their minds, even though they have no clue who the kid is or what the situation is. It's the principle that would make them irate.

[Defjamz26]

44 minutes ago, krunk said:

 

I don't know that him actually having sex with her constitutes a lie because his Official Statement, the one that comes directly from him says "I did not committ a crime".  It's not a crime to have sex.  Any other testimony i've seen on the internet with him or somebody else saying he didn't have sex with her comes from hear say from what i've gathered.  What he has officially said is "I did not committ a crime".   I think they chose this wording because somebody in that camp knows they had sex, so if he said "I didn't have sex with her" and the rape kit shows his body fluids in her body then he's automatically a liar.  If you say "I did not committ a crime" then you only have to defend that statement if the rape kit shows his body fluids in her body.

I might've have overlooked that part. I was thinking to where the original report had said that he told the police that nothing happened. All we were hearing at first is that they just laid on the bed. But that seems to either been either a false report on the part of the media or just general misinformation that never came from his mouth. But yeah the signs seem to point to them at least having sex. 

[BOTT]

55 minutes ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

I think thats where your issue may come up. Some website will just post a story that says "Colts draft alleged rapist". People who know nothing about the case will just assume he is guilty, and will cause PR issues by that alone. I think that its the uninformed people making knee jerk reactions to a headline that will cause the most PR issues. 

I think:

 

1 most people wouldn't even read the article because they don't care.

 

2 if they did read the article they would forget about 5 minutes later.  

[SaturdayAllDay]

2 minutes ago, BOTT said:

I think:

 

1 most people wouldn't even read the article because they don't care.

 

2 if they did read the article they would forget about 5 minutes later.  

I think there would always be people who remember, especially if hes found guilty. Its been 10 yrs since former CFL player Trevis Smith was found guilty of sexual assault up here (for not telling girls he had HIV) and Rider fans still hear about their team being full of "thugs and rapists" from the other fan bases. While it's not an internal PR issue after 10+ yrs, it's definitely not been forgotten. 

 

That being said, I dont expect protest marches or anything like that if anyone actually drafts Conley with a late round pick. It probably wouldnt be a major PR problem, but a PR problem nonetheless. There would be people mad all over social media, probably even a few "boycott _______!!!" posts/groups making the rounds. While that isnt the most terrible thing to happen to a football team, its still not good PR and provides a distraction in the locker room, especially if it gains enough traction that the media gets ahold of it (like the petitions to have Mike Vick cut from PIT a few yrs ago). Not to mention how the media will be all over Irsay and his "crazy antics" if Conley ends up guilty. 

 

All in all, I am with you in that I dont see it happening (and I get why a team wouldnt), and that IF we were to get a 6th/7th round pick in a trade down I wouldnt be too worked up about it if Ballard decided to roll the dice. Where we seem to differ is on whether or not we think other people will get worked up over it. Like with Tyreek Hill, Michael Vick, Etc. There will always be some sort of backlash. It might not be as big as some people are making it out to be, but it will still be an issue for the PR dept to deal with. 

[DougDew]

4 hours ago, OffensivelyPC said:

It would make it a lot more difficult to defend him - particularly because he doesn't know the results of the rape kit.  You don't want to be cornered into defending or explaining something legally because of a public response made pre-legal proceedings.  Any prosecuting attorney worth the paper his degree was put on would absolutely attempt to admit those statements into trial.  Whether or not they did or didn't is debatable, but any juror who knew of it or found out about it at trial would not be able to forget them.  The judge instructs not to consider anything not admitted in trial, but you can't exactly force people not to look at stuff on the internet, much less forget about it.

To be a problem for the defense, the public response would have to be a lie, wouldn't it?  Are you talking about when people rebut an argument with lies instead of telling the truth?   Of course if he rebuts her points with lies, then he runs the risk of jeopardizing his credibility if any of those lies are proven to be so. That's good advice to help a criminal beat the wrap, but its not really relevant when an innocent person is telling the truth.  

 

It seems pretty easy to say that "I didn't make it with her", and "I wasn't in the bathroom with her", if that's the truth.  There would be no witnesses to corroborate her story, and no positive DNA after a rape kit was administered, so how would a defender have a problem defending those statements?

 

[BOTT]

32 minutes ago, SaturdayAllDay said:

I think there would always be people who remember, especially if hes found guilty. Its been 10 yrs since former CFL player Trevis Smith was found guilty of sexual assault up here (for not telling girls he had HIV) and Rider fans still hear about their team being full of "thugs and rapists" from the other fan bases. While it's not an internal PR issue after 10+ yrs, it's definitely not been forgotten. 

 

That being said, I dont expect protest marches or anything like that if anyone actually drafts Conley with a late round pick. It probably wouldnt be a major PR problem, but a PR problem nonetheless. There would be people mad all over social media, probably even a few "boycott _______!!!" posts/groups making the rounds. While that isnt the most terrible thing to happen to a football team, its still not good PR and provides a distraction in the locker room, especially if it gains enough traction that the media gets ahold of it (like the petitions to have Mike Vick cut from PIT a few yrs ago). Not to mention how the media will be all over Irsay and his "crazy antics" if Conley ends up guilty. 

 

All in all, I am with you in that I dont see it happening (and I get why a team wouldnt), and that IF we were to get a 6th/7th round pick in a trade down I wouldnt be too worked up about it if Ballard decided to roll the dice. Where we seem to differ is on whether or not we think other people will get worked up over it. Like with Tyreek Hill, Michael Vick, Etc. There will always be some sort of backlash. It might not be as big as some people are making it out to be, but it will still be an issue for the PR dept to deal with. 

If he is found guilty he will never have played a down for the colts.  Hell, if he's even charged they could give up his rights.

 

but, it's a moot point.

[OffensivelyPC]

6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

To be a problem for the defense, the public response would have to be a lie, wouldn't it?  Are you talking about when people rebut an argument with lies instead of telling the truth?   Of course if he rebuts her points with lies, then he runs the risk of jeopardizing his credibility if any of those lies are proven to be so. That's good advice to help a criminal beat the wrap, but its not really relevant when an innocent person is telling the truth.  

 

It seems pretty easy to say that "I didn't make it with her", and "I wasn't in the bathroom with her", if that's the truth.  There would be no witnesses to corroborate her story, and no positive DNA after a rape kit was administered, so how would a defender have a problem defending those statements?

 

No, im talking about public statements. They are bad for you, period. Has nothing to do with its truth.

 

If it is in the public sphere, the veracity of any statement is up for debate - thats especially true when those statements are made before anything ever gets in court.  A defendant in criminal court is not required to testify, so its on the prosecution to prove any crime without the accused talking. You can google it, but i will save you the time...in 99.99999% of criminal cases, the defense does not put the defendant on the stand, because it opens up a can of worms that make the defense' case a hunded times harder. For that reason, you dont want your defendant client making legally significant statements in public. Its not about truth and persuasion.  Its about controlling the information available about the defendant. 

 

Make public statements and you forego (potentially) legal defenses you might have otherwise had because you have to defend those public statements. The "truth" of those statements are irrelevant,  because you have to argue why his statements are correct, and that looks guilty. 

 

From a defense standpoint,  you want to be able to force the police to make their case, not "get him off scott free." Thats harder to do when your client says something publicly when its impossible to force them in a criminal trial.

[DougDew]

17 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

No, im talking about public statements. They are bad for you, period. Has nothing to do with its truth.

 

If it is in the public sphere, the veracity of any statement is up for debate - thats especially true when those statements are made before anything ever gets in court.  A defendant in criminal court is not required to testify, so its on the prosecution to prove any crime without the accused talking. You can google it, but i will save you the time...in 99.99999% of criminal cases, the defense does not put the defendant on the stand, because it opens up a can of worms that make the defense' case a hunded times harder. For that reason, you dont want your defendant client making legally significant statements in public. Its not about truth and persuasion.  Its about controlling the information available about the defendant. 

 

Make public statements and you forego (potentially) legal defenses you might have otherwise had because you have to defend those public statements. The "truth" of those statements are irrelevant,  because you have to argue why his statements are correct, and that looks guilty. 

 

From a defense standpoint,  you want to be able to force the police to make their case, not "get him off scott free." Thats harder to do when your client says something publicly when its impossible to force them in a criminal trial.

Its not that complicated to say he didn't have sex with her if he didn't, especially since the listening world already knows that the test kit will be the marker for who is telling the truth.  It cant show his DNA if it isn't there.  There is nothing to argue in court other than "told ya so"

 

If I didn't have sex with her....I'd get that out there as loud and as soon as possible as often as possible for when the negative results come back, which would then imply she is a liar.  

 

[southwest1]

On April 25, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Malakai432 said:

 

Sounds a little odd to me.  So this Brooke woman just decided to go ditch her friends and go hang around some random guy she met in an elavator??  Stuff like this ticks me off on both ends, why would this woman be so stupid and why would Conley even attempt to do something so stupid days before the draft??  The whole situation just sounds flat out odd. 

 

Thanks for posting the PR!

 

I get what you're driving here M432. Don't put yourself in a vulnerable or compromising position either as a NFL prospect or an overzealous fan wanting a piece of the action [money wise]. No, I am not blaming anyone as the victim here. I just happen to agree with you. Exercise common sense & don't do anything that costs you millions or looks suspicious on the eve of the draft. 

On April 25, 2017 at 6:45 PM, Malakai432 said:

 

If I wanted to find a skank I'd just go to Lebanon, OR. . . . a stripclub.  I'll make sure to stay away from elevators though.

LOL! Good point. Ray Rice lost his football career in one & tragically Prince overdosed in one at his mansion in Paisley Park. I watched a really good documentary today on it called "Prince: When Doves Cry" on the Reez channel, but I digress. 

On April 25, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Malakai432 said:

 

 

 

I was just kidding anyways.  I live right next to Lebanon, Indiana.  Not a bad city but I've had some regretful encounters there to say the least. 

I hope you never got robbed man. I like you man! You're a good dude & very funny! I'm not sure what 'regrettable encounters' means. Sorry bro. 

[AZColt11]

I hope he is innocent.  Be a shame to see yet another guy with so much talent waste away in the criminal justice system.

[krunk]

There's video on the internet right now showing that this girl was actually at the Club with Conley and interacting with him. A deal is being made of it because she told police she didnt know him until she met him in the Westin hotel on the elevator.

[ColtsBlueFL]

5 hours ago, Superman said:

By the time the draft started, it was becoming clear that he wasn't involved. The risk was still too high, but by the second or third day of the draft, teams were willing to pull the trigger, and several teams were going to. His agents stalled them out. I don't think we know which teams said they were going to draft him on Day 3, but his agents say they successfully bluffed their way all the way out of the draft so he could be a UDFA. 

 

Good post.  And You're right, we never found out which teams were going to pull the trigger. And for those that don't remember, here's how it went down from there-

 

"We can put it on the record now: We were never going back in the draft," his agency's general counsel, Rick Smith, told Klemko. "If someone had drafted him, we would’ve had a long, long discussion about it, but at the end of the day you can’t go back in the draft. He could get injured, gain weight, or 10 great tackles could come out. Too many risks."

 

The bluff worked. 

[rock8591]

To me, it's an obvious answer because it is NOT A RISK. I'd still draft Conley in round 1.

 

The story smells like the world's largest gigantic fat smelly rat there is, much like how Colin Kaepernick was "investigated for rape" as TMZ sloppily reported, and how Derrick Rose was being sued in civil court for rape.

 

When Conley falls, I really hope he hires a legal team and goes after his accuser for everything she's got, even if it means she has a net worth of $500 and he takes it from her. Of course, unfortunately, he is too good of a person to do that and would not go after something so petty. I would if I was falsely accused.

[southwest1]

7 hours ago, PeterBowman said:

this is why (in these instances IF the allegations are proven to be false and frivolous) that false reporting of a rape should carry a penalty equal to that of an actual rape. They can totally destroy someone.

I agree that a false allegation of sexual assault should be punishable if proven inaccurate legally. However, your sentencing line making the accusation of rape equal to the crime of rape is not a good idea. Instead, have the person in question who lied be forced to check a box that they lied to law enforcement personnel about a serious assault that never took place. Think of it like Olympic athletes on steroids who lied to the FBI & must check the felony box on say a job application. No time behind bars literally, but definitely a Scarlett Letter of sorts. 

 

To get thrown in the slammer, I think you have to prove as a prosecutor that money changed hands illegally or physical violence occurred in some proven capacity. I get the hit to an innocent person's reputation & lost earning potential income wise. But, rape & a rape accusation are not the same thing. 

[rockywoj]

If he is off draft boards, I wouldn't hesitate to get back into the 7th round to draft him.   Few 7th rounders ever amount to anything anyway, so I'd not be afraid to take a flier on him.  If he's proven innocent, you get a steal of a talent.  If he's proven guilty, you shrug your shoulders secure in the knowledge that you invested very little, and you release his rights.  No harm, no foul, very little risk.  

 

As for La'el Collins, at the time I was calling for the Colts to call his bluff about refusing to sign & sitting out a year, by taking him in the last round.  Again, I figured if you lost out, oh well, no big investment lost. 

[southwest1]

I can understand mens frustrations with a situation like this because society sometimes a celebrity or pre draft NFL star can bump into an aggressive, attractive, female gold digger who might throw themselves at a famous guy or soon to be famous guy for financial gain & then cry wolf if the athlete expresses no interest in her at all & then file a sexual assault claim a few days or weeks later. 

 

What frustrates guys most is this: If a guy accused a woman of raping him, very few in the media would believe him. People automatically assume that no guy would ever refuse physical intimacy ever & what do you mean a man couldn't restrain a female aggressor without harming them & just exit the premises quickly & quietly without incident? 

 

Again, I'm not blaming any person here. I'm just saying that there is a double standard in sexual assault cases that's all. 

[southwest1]

2 hours ago, DougDew said:

If I didn't have sex with her....I'd get that out there as loud and as soon as possible as often as possible for when the negative results come back, which would then imply she is a liar.  

I know that the rookie symposium can't place until after an athlete is drafted by an NFL team, but your post made me wonder DD how in depth speakers get regarding ways to protect yourself from the vices of fame, reckless spending habits, pretty women, & friends & family using you as their sole meal ticket. 

 

I realize that Conley's situation & the NFL Symposium are 2 different situations, but I always wanna know who lectures the new recruits on dangerous women up to no good & what preventive steps they should take to stay out of criminal quagmires of seduction & manipulation? 

 

It's not my place to judge who is lying or not. I just feel bad for guys who grew up in poverty, suddenly get a taste of real money, no woman ever gave them the time of day before & then wham you get all this attention from a female that is drop dead gorgeous. It's gotta be liberating & extremely unsettling at the same time. How's a kid who came from nothing supposed to deal with that? Temptation & inexperience are a lethal combination. 

[Malakai432]

4 hours ago, southwest1 said:

I get what you're driving here M432. Don't put yourself in a vulnerable or compromising position either as a NFL prospect or an overzealous fan wanting a piece of the action [money wise]. No, I am not blaming anyone as the victim here. I just happen to agree with you. Exercise common sense & don't do anything that costs you millions or looks suspicious on the eve of the draft. 

LOL! Good point. Ray Rice lost his football career in one & tragically Prince overdosed in one at his mansion in Paisley Park. I watched a really good documentary today on it called "Prince: When Doves Cry" on the Reez channel, but I digress. 

I hope you never got robbed man. I like you man! You're a good dude & very funny! I'm not sure what 'regrettable encounters' means. Sorry bro. 

 

Hahah, no never robbed at least man but one guy stole a couple things as he delivered a pizza to my house, the balls on that guy.  I didn't realize it until he was gone.  Also, some other non earth shattering encounters, that being said though I've had friends from Lebanon before though also! 

[Malakai432]

3 hours ago, krunk said:

There's video on the internet right now showing that this girl was actually at the Club with Conley and interacting with him. A deal is being made of it because she told police she didnt know him until she met him in the Westin hotel on the elevator.

 

Ouch, that's not good for her at all if it appears to be true.  Pretty big difference meeting someone at a club then just flat out telling police you met them on an elevator.  

 

[AZColt11]

3 hours ago, southwest1 said:

I can understand mens frustrations with a situation like this because society sometimes a celebrity or pre draft NFL star can bump into an aggressive, attractive, female gold digger who might throw themselves at a famous guy or soon to be famous guy for financial gain & then cry wolf if the athlete expresses no interest in her at all & then file a sexual assault claim a few days or weeks later. 

 

What frustrates guys most is this: If a guy accused a woman of raping him, very few in the media would believe him. People automatically assume that no guy would ever refuse physical intimacy ever & what do you mean a man couldn't restrain a female aggressor without harming them & just exit the premises quickly & quietly without incident? 

 

Again, I'm not blaming any person here. I'm just saying that there is a double standard in sexual assault cases that's all. 

Hey I'm going to throw a another quick scenarios at ya.  What if a woman held a man at gunpoint and demanded sex?  She could still physically arouse him even though he doesn't want to do it and still rape him.  I would think this would happen more likely in a case where a women was unable to get pregnant via her partner and just be hell-bent on trying anything.  But still, it could happen.

[AZColt11]

1 minute ago, Malakai432 said:

 

Ouch, that's not good for her at all if it appears to be true.  Pretty big difference meeting someone at a club then just flat out telling police you met them on an elevator.  

 

If that is true, prosecute her to the fullest extent of the law.  We need to show people that if they accuse someone of something they had BETTER be telling the truth.  Now, that STILL wouldn't prove that she wasn't raped though.  You can surely be raped by someone you know too.  But it would not be a good look for the rest of her story.

[Malakai432]

Just now, AZColt11 said:

If that is true, prosecute her to the fullest extent of the law.  We need to show people that if they accuse someone of something they had BETTER be telling the truth.  Now, that STILL wouldn't prove that she wasn't raped though.  You can surely be raped by someone you know too.  But it would not be a good look for the rest of her story.

 

Yeah I agree people involved with blantant false reports need to be punished to the fullest extent of the law as with people who are the perpetrators of these sexual assault cases if proven guilty.  

 

False allegations ruin people's lives.  One would think it would be a felony but I'm not sure???  I think it depends on state law and countless other variables.  I found a little article that states - (btw not sure if anyone's posted anything like this sorry if so):

 

"Defamation or Slander

Question

Recently, I was falsely accused of rape by a girl that I knew from my college class. She later admitted that her accusation was false and dropped all the charges. Meanwhile, I lost my work study job at the campus library after everyone heard the accusations and I’ve been having a hard time paying for my tuition and expenses without a job. I read about defamation of character lawsuits. Is defamation for falsely accusing of rape something I could sue her for?

Answer

There are the two main types of defamation cases: libel and slander. Both involve harmful, false statements that cause damage someone’s reputation, but libel requires that the statement be in writing or somehow “published.” With slander, all that is required is that the defamatory statement be spoken to a third party (someone other than you). 

In many cases, damages (the harm you suffered) are handled differently depending on whether the statement at issue is considered libel or slander. From your question, it isn’t clear whether the accusations were spoken or made in writing.  But in your case, it may not matter much, because under defamation laws in most states, falsely accusing someone of having committed a crime is considered “defamatory per se” or “actionable per se.” That means harm is taken as a given in the eyes of the law, and harm to your reputation is presumed. 

Depending on your state’s laws, you may only need to show that the young woman made the statements, and that the statements were false. This isn’t usually all that easy, but it sounds like you may have some type of record of her declaring the falsity of the accusations.

Again, depending on your state’s laws, the young woman might be liable for any resulting actual damages stemming from the statements -- money you lost as a result of losing your job, damage to your ability to secure new work, and harm to your reputation because of the false accusations of your having committed a serious crime. You may also be entitled to compensation for things like embarrassment, mental anguish, and humiliation. It might be worth it to discuss your options with an attorney."

 

http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/personal-injury/legal-recourse-falsely-accused-crime.html

[LockeDown]

So Conley and the girl were just laying on the bed doing nothing. He later kicks her out.  She is infuriated enough to get a rape kit and accuse him?  She wouldn't have had the rape kit done unless they had sex, otherwise she has no case.  If they did have sex, then Conley and company are lying.  Why would they say there was no sex rather than consensual sex?  

I could see a scenario where a naive fan girl innocently wants to meet and hangout with the local football hero, and is not there to have sex and soon wants to leave when it's clear that is what's being expected.  That seems to be her side.  The other side is a girl who had consensual sex with him and then was mad when he kicked her out after sex.  However, Conleys story of no sex doesn't add up.  

[Jact.stark]

Just now, LockeDown said:

So Conley and the girl were just laying on the bed doing nothing. He later kicks her out.  She is infuriated enough to get a rape kit and accuse him?  She wouldn't have had the rape kit done unless they had sex, otherwise she has no case.  If they did have sex, then Conley and company are lying.  Why would they say there was no sex rather than consensual sex?  

I could see a scenario where a naive fan girl innocently wants to meet and hangout with the local football hero, and is not there to have sex and soon wants to leave when it's clear that is what's being expected.  That seems to be her side.  The other side is a girl who had consensual sex with him and then was mad when he kicked her out after sex.  However, Conleys story of no sex doesn't add up.  

If Conley had sex with the girl, he is gonna go undrafted after that he has to wait and see what is gonna happen with the accusation, if he didn't have sex with the girl he is gonna drop because all the drama but not far, i can see another L. Collins trade up to the top of the second.

[DougDew]

3 hours ago, LockeDown said:

So Conley and the girl were just laying on the bed doing nothing. He later kicks her out.  She is infuriated enough to get a rape kit and accuse him?  She wouldn't have had the rape kit done unless they had sex, otherwise she has no case.  If they did have sex, then Conley and company are lying.  Why would they say there was no sex rather than consensual sex?  

I could see a scenario where a naive fan girl innocently wants to meet and hangout with the local football hero, and is not there to have sex and soon wants to leave when it's clear that is what's being expected.  That seems to be her side.  The other side is a girl who had consensual sex with him and then was mad when he kicked her out after sex.  However, Conleys story of no sex doesn't add up.  

Winner winner chicken dinner!  

 

Its going to come down to a credibility issue as to who is telling the truth if it was consensual or not.  Evidently, the event ended badly since she got "kicked out" of the room.

 

Now, I'm in no position to say who is lying or if a crime was committed, but determining who is more credible will take time for the authorities to sort out.  

 

Maybe Conley can get drafted next year.

[DougDew]

6 hours ago, southwest1 said:

I know that the rookie symposium can't place until after an athlete is drafted by an NFL team, but your post made me wonder DD how in depth speakers get regarding ways to protect yourself from the vices of fame, reckless spending habits, pretty women, & friends & family using you as their sole meal ticket. 

 

I realize that Conley's situation & the NFL Symposium are 2 different situations, but I always wanna know who lectures the new recruits on dangerous women up to no good & what preventive steps they should take to stay out of criminal quagmires of seduction & manipulation? 

 

It's not my place to judge who is lying or not. I just feel bad for guys who grew up in poverty, suddenly get a taste of real money, no woman ever gave them the time of day before & then wham you get all this attention from a female that is drop dead gorgeous. It's gotta be liberating & extremely unsettling at the same time. How's a kid who came from nothing supposed to deal with that? Temptation & inexperience are a lethal combination. 

NFL and colleges could just skip the expensive programs and tell kids to listen to their grandfathers and pastors when they say "sex outside of marriage will cause you problems"

 

Naw...I guess that's a really crazy thing to say these days.

[Defjamz26]

4 hours ago, Malakai432 said:

 

Ouch, that's not good for her at all if it appears to be true.  Pretty big difference meeting someone at a club then just flat out telling police you met them on an elevator.  

 

Damages her credibility for sure. But I still think they at least had sex. Now what they'll try and determine is if it was consensual. The video isn't the smoking gun. For him to get drafted the girl would need to recant her story before 8:00 p.m.

[jvan1973]

22 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

Damages her credibility for sure. But I still think they at least had sex. Now what they'll try and determine is if it was consensual. The video isn't the smoking gun. For him to get drafted the girl would need to recant her story before 8:00 p.m.

What are you basing the idea that they had sex on?

[jvan1973]

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

NFL and colleges could just skip the expensive programs and tell kids to listen to their grandfathers and pastors when they say "sex outside of marriage will cause you problems"

 

Naw...I guess that's a really crazy thing to say these days.

Yes,  because that works.  College kids are going to have sex outside of marriage.  This isn't a new thing