Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Araiza Troubles


dw49

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 318
  • Created
  • Last Reply
6 hours ago, John Hammonds said:

I asked the same question, and had to go back to the LA Times article.  Apparently, according to one of the lawyers for one of the guys being accused, he couldn't comment because there was still an active criminal investigation.  They say in the article that the investigation bogged down after the new year.  Seems to me that she was unhappy with how law enforcement was conducting this, and launched her own civil lawsuit.

I'm guessing that there's still the possibility of criminal charges and an arrest.  But I wonder what's taking them so long.  There's got to be a reason.  Will just have to keep our eyes open for new developments.  It's still possible that her story doesn't check out.  That their sex was consensual.  If she left the room into the party bloody and crying, do the other people attending the party corroborate that account?  What if they don't?  Just gonna have to wait and see.

In the meantime, I'm glad we didn't draft him, as some have suggested we should have when Rigo went down, and had this mess in our laps rather than in Buffalo's.

Most rape kits take a year or more to come back from labs. There’s just too many in the system and not enough labs or lab techs. 
 

 

that said, I’m very disappointed that the league came down like they did (should have done so even harder) on Watson only to pass the buck on this kid. At a minimum he should be suspended pending the outcome of the investigations

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After the dubious way that the NFL handled (mishandled) the Deshaun Watson debacle - I can't say I expect any better outcome "IF" this young man did - in fact - participate in something this despicable.

 

The NFL proved - once again - that they want the players to play - with little regard to any assaults and/or crimes that are perpetrated against women.

 

SHAME ON YOU NFL!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why NFL discipline is viewed as a joke because it is.

 

player accused of sexual assault of over 20 women:  11 games just in time for you to play your old team and do a huge rating.


player accused of gang rape: well it happened before he got to the NFL so not our problem.


star running back accused of assault: no action taken despite having a whole off season to do something.

 

Player accused of betting: one year before you can blink.

 

the NFL cares about one thing.  It’s bottom line.  Never forget it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

Regardless of age what he’s accused of is still bad enough and a very serious crime.

Yes but key words: accused of. That's the bugaboo about things like this; it's usually very hard to know who's telling the truth beyond any reasonable doubt. If it is as she says, he could (and should) be in jail along with anyone else involved. But what if it's not? What if it's proven she's lying, for whatever reason? What happens to her? I'm betting nothing, as is typically the case. That's a joke and one of many examples of what a joke our legal system can be. A woman can lie about something like that, potentially destroying some guy's life, and get away with it. I think if it was proven she's lying (but again extremely hard to do), she should get whatever penalty he was going to get for the crime. 

 

Anyway back to Haack. :) I think we were fortunate to get him, imperfect though he may be, this late in the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, JediXMan said:


There’s recordings of him admitting to it he’s done.


He's not done becayse he’s admitted to having sex with her.   He’ll simply say she consented.  

These are very difficult and complicated cases.   It’s why few in law enforcement like these cases.  There’s often lots of gray and not enough black and white where things are easier to decide. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Unfortunately the age of legal consent in most states is 16 (it is in Indiana), it isn't 18 like most people think. If it is 18 there than that changes a lot for sure. Law wise where the age of 18 comes in is, one can't send nude pictures of a person that isn't 18 or older on their phone for example. Weird how the law works. I would question why she was at his house in the 1st place. If she got raped and it is proven, law enforcement should throw the book at him. He may have done it, if so then he should do time for the crime and be banned from the league. After what happened to the Duke Lacrosse players, I never jumped to a conclusion until the evidence is provided in full circle. Peter Falk Detective GIF by PeacockTV


Why would you question her being at the house?   That’s hardly a signal for consent.  Young kids in a college setting gather for all sorts of reasons.  
 

And seemingly most everything that's been revealed in this discussion would say to me she’s credible.   She went for help.  She wrote about it in her diary.  She turned down an offer of money.  Not sure what else she could’ve done?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Unfortunately the age of legal consent in most states is 16 (it is in Indiana), it isn't 18 like most people think. If it is 18 there than that changes a lot for sure. Law wise where the age of 18 comes in is, one can't send nude pictures of a person that isn't 18 or older on their phone for example. Weird how the law works. I would question why she was at his house in the 1st place. If she got raped and it is proven, law enforcement should throw the book at him. He may have done it, if so then he should do time for the crime and be banned from the league. After what happened to the Duke Lacrosse players, I never jumped to a conclusion until the evidence is provided in full circle. Peter Falk Detective GIF by PeacockTV

Ehh not entirely accurate. It is the legal age of consent if both parties are under age 18 and/or within 3 years. So a 19 yr old generally would be safe.Charges can be pressed, if a 16 year old and a 21 year old hook up. 
 

but here’s the other catch, say an 18 year old has sex with a 17 yr old, but video taped it or took nude photos of the 17yr old, despite the age of consent, it is considered child porn in Indiana and they will come after that one very fast, and with the boom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:


He's not done becayse he’s admitted to having sex with her.   He’ll simply say she consented.  

These are very difficult and complicated cases.   It’s why few in law enforcement like these cases.  There’s often lots of gray and not enough black and white where things are easier to decide. 

This is where the rape kit is going to be vital. Part of the rape kit is an alcohol and drug screen. Any traces whatsoever of either in her system, AND if dna confirms he at least had sex with her, more often than not, the charges will stick and most judges and juries will as well. The difference here though, she’s gonna be going against a guy with more money for lawyers and I’m sure the Bills will help with those costs too

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NFL cannot currently punish Araiza in anyway because the incident happened before he was a member of the league. 
 

The Bills could choose to do something but that is a team decision only at this point. They are the only ones who could discipline him to some degree. 

 

If criminal charges do get filed against him then the NFL could take action and it would be in their right to do so.

 

It shall be interesting to see what becomes of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, csmopar said:

This is where the rape kit is going to be vital. Part of the rape kit is an alcohol and drug screen. Any traces whatsoever of either in her system, AND if dna confirms he at least had sex with her, more often than not, the charges will stick and most judges and juries will as well. The difference here though, she’s gonna be going against a guy with more money for lawyers and I’m sure the Bills will help with those costs too


Its my understanding that he’s already admitted to having sex with her.   Told her in a recorded phone call that she should get tested for any possible sexually transmitted diseases.  
 

So I think we’re past the “did they or didn’t they” stage.   It’s now in the….  Did she consent?   Was she sober enough to have consented?    And I agree that the level of lawyering for both sides will be critical.   That said, I don’t think Buffalo helps out beyond his salary.   That would be a PR disaster and nightmare for the team.   My guess is the Bills will quietly encourage the punter to try and settle.   The longer this goes, it gets more difficult for both sides.  
 

Buffalo doesn’t want what Cleveland has gone through these last few months.  I think this could be settled next off season.  But I’m guessing here…. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

He can just say she told him she was 18. Can't disprove it


Well…. If he hasn’t made that claim by now — and I’m not saying one way or the other — but if he hasn’t made the claim by now, making it later looks bad, like he’s making it up.   He’s already been interviewed by police.   Did the subject of her she come up?   How about her drinking?   
 

There are lots of questions for onlookers like us but not a lot of answers.   At least, for now. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Well…. If he hasn’t made that claim by now — and I’m not saying one way or the other — but if he hasn’t made the claim by now, making it later looks bad, like he’s making it up.   He’s already been interviewed by police.   Did the subject of her she come up?   How about her drinking?   
 

There are lots of questions for onlookers like us but not a lot of answers.   At least, for now. 
 

 

And I'm not trying to defend him. Farthest thing from it. If he's guilty, he should be locked up and see how he likes being forced. I'm just saying cases like these are never easy to prosecute

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, CR91 said:

 

And I'm not trying to defend him. Farthest thing from it. If he's guilty, he should be locked up and see how he likes being forced. I'm just saying cases like these are never easy to prosecute


100 percent.   These cases are incredibly hard on everyone involved.  And by all accounts, for a variety of reasons, no one likes them…..   Victims, suspects, police, judges prosecutors, def attorneys, you name it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

This is why NFL discipline is viewed as a joke because it is.

 

player accused of sexual assault of over 20 women:  11 games just in time for you to play your old team and do a huge rating.


player accused of gang rape: well it happened before he got to the NFL so not our problem.


star running back accused of assault: no action taken despite having a whole off season to do something.

 

Player accused of betting: one year before you can blink.

 

the NFL cares about one thing.  It’s bottom line.  Never forget it. 

 

 

I cannot fault them for that.  If viewers and fans stopped watching, they would act differently.   Will you stop watching because of these incidents?   I haven't.  I thought that letting Vick back in to play was horrible, but I kept watching.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

This is why NFL discipline is viewed as a joke because it is.

 

player accused of sexual assault of over 20 women:  11 games just in time for you to play your old team and do a huge rating.


player accused of gang rape: well it happened before he got to the NFL so not our problem.


star running back accused of assault: no action taken despite having a whole off season to do something.

 

Player accused of betting: one year before you can blink.

 

the NFL cares about one thing.  It’s bottom line.  Never forget it. 

 

There are 1696 players that will make a roster. 53×32. I am not going to let 9 or 10 clowns ruin it for me. At every job and all sports you will have 9 or 10 rotten eggs when your dealing with 100+ employees. It isn't like the NFL is full of bad guys. If it was like 30 players out of 1696 then that would be a major problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:


Why would you question her being at the house?   That’s hardly a signal for consent.  Young kids in a college setting gather for all sorts of reasons.  
 

And seemingly most everything that's been revealed in this discussion would say to me she’s credible.   She went for help.  She wrote about it in her diary.  She turned down an offer of money.  Not sure what else she could’ve done?  

Not saying it is consent and all evidence points to him being guilty. These are just questions that will be asked in any investigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, csmopar said:

Ehh not entirely accurate. It is the legal age of consent if both parties are under age 18 and/or within 3 years. So a 19 yr old generally would be safe.Charges can be pressed, if a 16 year old and a 21 year old hook up. 
 

but here’s the other catch, say an 18 year old has sex with a 17 yr old, but video taped it or took nude photos of the 17yr old, despite the age of consent, it is considered child porn in Indiana and they will come after that one very fast, and with the boom

Pretty much on que and accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, King Colt said:

Why is it some similar cases come up months and years after the alleged crime?

 

Most people in "similar cases" never say anything at all. So the "cases" never "come up" (never revealed), as it is viewed as shameful.

 

In this case, she reported it the next day. However, since the criminal case is taking so long (which is common), she brought a civil case against the alleged perpetrators.

 

As for those who settled with Watson, you will have to ask them. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Myles said:

 

I cannot fault them for that.  If viewers and fans stopped watching, they would act differently.   Will you stop watching because of these incidents?   I haven't.  I thought that letting Vick back in to play was horrible, but I kept watching.  

I get why they do it.  That was not my point.  My point was it’s a joke which it is.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

There are 1696 players that will make a roster. 53×32. I am not going to let 9 or 10 clowns ruin it for me. At every job and all sports you will have 9 or 10 rotten eggs when your dealing with 100+ employees. It isn't like the NFL is full of bad guys. If it was like 30 players out of 1696 then that would be a major problem.

My point was not all NFL players are bad or even the vast majority of them are.  My point was the system used to deal with those who are bad is a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

My point was not all NFL players are bad or even the vast majority of them are.  My point was the system used to deal with those who are bad is a joke.

I don't mind how the NFL punishes players.   Since every case is different, I think different punishments are OK.   They own the sport, so they can do what they want.  I can accept that.  I do think they are too lenient on players, but I will still watch.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GoColts8818 said:

My point was not all NFL players are bad or even the vast majority of them are.  My point was the system used to deal with those who are bad is a joke.

I think they handled the Watson punishment well. 11 games and a 5 Million dollar fine is fair and pretty good considering he had no criminal charges filed against him and 2 grand jury's did not indict him either. The NFL stepped in and gave him a lengthy suspension and a hefty fine because he affected a lot of women's lives and made the NFL look bad with immoral acts. That suspension will make him think about what he done believe me and that wrecks the Browns season. If you look at their schedule, 4-7 is about the best they can go unless JB just plays the best ball in his career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CR91 said:

 

And I'm not trying to defend him. Farthest thing from it. If he's guilty, he should be locked up and see how he likes being forced. I'm just saying cases like these are never easy to prosecute

A Bills beat writer here in Rochester interviewed a criminal lawyer who specializes in rape cases in California. She said the very fact that he admitted to having sex with her is very bad for any defense he might try to present.  He really through shade at the Bills for even drafting him.  Knowing how deep teams research players he thinks they had to know about this case.  He thinks it will be a cloud over the team as long as he remains on the roster.  It will be interesting to see how long that is.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think critics of the NFL dont understand they are battling what is one of the most powerful labor unions there is, and they cant just do whatever they feel is right.

 

There is a contract here and there is likely specific language to protect current players from being punished for actions that preceeded their involvement with the union. Everything is more complicated when a labor union is involved.

 

They probably cant punish him without violating their agreement with the players, which wont stick anyways.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

My point was not all NFL players are bad or even the vast majority of them are.  My point was the system used to deal with those who are bad is a joke.

 

I am not disagreeing with you but what do you believe is a fair way to handle such incidents? Serious question. 

 

I think I would need some kind of evidence to punish someone, but in many of these cases there is little to no evidence.

 

I recall something that happened many years ago. A few St. John's University basketball players were accused of rape. It was learned later that one of them had made a video that showed that the encounter was consentual. I personally believe that recording their actions with the woman is distasteful and reprehensible but without that video, they would have been prosecuted and convicted. These players were poor and could not afford good defense attorneys. The video was their defense. They were still punished by St. John's, as they were out past curfew and what they did was against their rules. But if this involved players in the NFL, would what they did merit punishment? Is the accusation alone enough to punish a player?

 

Having said that, there are many in this position that never report these incidents because they feel shame and think that others won't believe them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NFLfan said:

 

I am not disagreeing with you but what do you believe is a fair way to handle such incidents? Serious question. 

 

I think I would need some kind of evidence to punish someone, but in many of these cases there is little to no evidence.

 

I recall something that happened many years ago. A few St. John's University basketball players were accused of rape. It was learned later that one of them had made a video that showed that the encounter was consentual. I personally believe that recording their actions with the woman is distasteful and reprehensible but without that video, they would have been prosecuted and convicted. These players were poor and could not afford good defense attorneys. The video was their defense. They were still punished by St. John's, as they were out past curfew and what they did was against their rules. But if this involved players in the NFL, would what they did merit punishment? Is the accusation alone enough to punish a player?

 

Having said that, there are many in this position that never report these incidents because they feel shame and think that others won't believe them.

 

My issue is less with the system and more with how it’s being applied or well not being applied in some cases.  My word choice might not have been the best.  When you suspend a player longer for gambling than you do for assault or sexual assault it shows what the NFL’s priorities are and aren’t.  I don’t think that’s going to shock anyone that they care the most about their bottom line but it doesn’t make it right either.  
 

As for the evidence part the judge who did the first Watson suspension pretty much said the NFL met their burden of proof about him she was just bound by precedent.  So it wasn’t lack of proof that was the issue here.  This isn’t a court of law where they have to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.  
 

With the Bills punter they aren’t even looking into the evidence based on reports.  They are just going happened before he got to the NFL not our problem.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GoColts8818 said:

My point was not all NFL players are bad or even the vast majority of them are.  My point was the system used to deal with those who are bad is a joke.


My understanding is that the current rules about the NFL nit getting involved were negotiated between the NFLPA and the League.    So if an incident happens while a player is in the league,  the NFL will rule.   But they won’t get involved if the incident happened BEFORE the player entered the league, which is the case with Araiza.

 

I don’t like it either, I’m just saying this was negotiated and not a case of the NFL just bring random. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SOMDColtsfan said:

She was 17 at the time? Unless something's changed, don't believe this will end well for Araiza

He admitted he had sex with her.  A 17 year old.  It’s just a matter of time.  I expect him to be cut.  I can’t see the Pegula’s wanting him on the team.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I think they handled the Watson punishment well. 11 games and a 5 Million dollar fine is fair and pretty good considering he had no criminal charges filed against him and 2 grand jury's did not indict him either. The NFL stepped in and gave him a lengthy suspension and a hefty fine because he affected a lot of women's lives and made the NFL look bad with immoral acts. That suspension will make him think about what he done believe me and that wrecks the Browns season. If you look at their schedule, 4-7 is about the best they can go unless JB just plays the best ball in his career.

So you think think him being suspend less than a player accessed of gambling is right for what he did?


Also if you listen to his press conference after the suspension came out he’s not thinking about what he did he’s laughing to the bank.  To the point an NFL advisory said he’s playing them.

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/nfl-advisor-says-she-feels-deshaun-watson-is-playing-us-after-browns-q-nonsense-denial-of-wrongdoing-025644729.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, richard pallo said:

He admitted he had sex with her.  A 17 year old.  It’s just a matter of time.  I expect him to be cut.  I can’t see the Pegula’s wanting him on the team.  

The Bills knew about these reports BEFORE they cut the other punter.  In other words they hoped it wouldn’t come out and they could keep a guy they thought was better and would help them win.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GoColts8818 said:

The Bills knew about these reports BEFORE they cut the other punter.  In other words they hoped it wouldn’t come out and they could keep a guy they thought was better and would help them win.  

Not if you read the local beat writers here.  They might have but apparently are walking back that narrative.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, richard pallo said:

A Bills beat writer here in Rochester interviewed a criminal lawyer who specializes in rape cases in California. She said the very fact that he admitted to having sex with her is very bad for any defense he might try to present.  He really through shade at the Bills for even drafting him.  Knowing how deep teams research players he thinks they had to know about this case.  He thinks it will be a cloud over the team as long as he remains on the roster.  It will be interesting to see how long that is.  

And that cloud gets even darker since it’s been reported they knew about this and choose to cut another punter instead.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, richard pallo said:

A Bills beat writer here in Rochester interviewed a criminal lawyer who specializes in rape cases in California. She said the very fact that he admitted to having sex with her is very bad for any defense he might try to present.  He really through shade at the Bills for even drafting him.  Knowing how deep teams research players he thinks they had to know about this case.  He thinks it will be a cloud over the team as long as he remains on the roster.  It will be interesting to see how long that is.  

 

I don't see how it's bad? If they have the rape kit, it means they have his DNA. He can't say they didn't have sex if the rape kit says they did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I read something that said the leaked scores were only partial. And now that I'm thinking about it more, I think they were saying the low score that was published was from his first attempt, and he might have retaken the test and done better. It's kind of fuzzy, but that might be the case.    Either way, my point was that I remember notable pushback against the leaked scores, and their importance. So if certain people are now saying that they didn't care about the S2 scores a year ago, that doesn't sound like revisionist history to me. One of those unnamed execs could be Ballard, who was very vocal about not liking how Stroud was talked about. And we know the Colts subscribe to S2...     Some suggestions... unsubstantiated rumors that get repeated enough that they begin to be accepted as fact. Who knows what the Panthers were doing last year, but if they let the S2 test decide which QB to draft, they deserve all the dysfunction they've experienced. I don't think even the Panthers are that lost. More likely, Bryce Young was the guy they decided on, and maybe the higher S2 was in his favor, but would have just been one of several factors that they used.      The way it's described, there's potentially value in the S2 testing. But using Stroud as the example, if you watch him play, and then look at a low S2 score, and can't figure out how to reconcile the disparity between the tape and the test score, then you don't know how to evaluate. Overall, I think way too much is being made of the S2 thing, similar to how way to much was made of Wonderlic scores. It's just one piece of info, and probably carries a small amount of importance overall.    But if a team wants to use S2 testing to prepare a development plan, especially for a QB, there's no real reason they can't have him take the test after the draft. If that's really part of the value, and the player declines the test before the draft because he doesn't want to be scrutinized over it, then ask him to take it once you've drafted him.
    • Ask Philip Rivers to give him advice on parenthood, AR should stick around in the NFL for a while then. 😉
    • Yes, I think so too.
    • It's very telling that nobody actually came out and said that Stroud's published test score was inaccurate. Yes there was pushback about the scores, but they all were very general and non-specific. "I've seen published scores that aren't correct", "Those scores miss a lot of context", etc.    And especially when Stroud himself was asked about those scores. Do you remember what his answer was? He didn't dispute any of it. He just said he's not a test-taker, he's a football player.    I think several big time reporters/analysts reported it. I think I first heard it from Zierlein. But can't find the original. Here's Pelissero reporting on it too: https://www.nfl.com/news/2023-nfl-draft-pro-execs-scouts-coaches-rank-and-evaluate-the-qb-class           There have been some suggestions that the Panthers took Bryce Young over Stroud partially because of the S2 test, because they valued it highly.    Yeah, I don't remember if it was reported as players refusing it or their agents not allowing them to take it, but this is what one of the podcasts I listen to reported. Not 100% sure which one it is because I consume a lot of those draft podcasts.    They probably can... not sure if the players would do it. But if the teams knew it in advance they might have better idea of whether development in certain areas is even possible. 
    • I don't think I agree that it's revisionist. Last year, some scores leaked, and then Stroud's scores got aggregated and the story was sensationalized. But all along, there was pushback about the scores -- were they accurate, was there missing context, was there an incomplete leak designed to make people discount Stroud, was someone trying to gain leverage for a trade, etc. There was skepticism from reputable people, and even though it was noted that many teams value the S2 test, I don't think anyone ever expected or predicted that Stroud's draft stock was significantly affected by whatever his score was.    I don't remember reading that he took the test multiple times. That's an interesting variable, if it's true.   There can be value in the test, but like with any other piece of information, how do you apply what's learned to your evaluation process? Like you said, there's a lot of work to figure out how this testing correlates to a player's ability to perform in the NFL, same as with any other datapoint. I don't know if it should be dismissed, but I don't think any team is letting S2 scores rule over their scouting process. Not even for QBs.    I haven't heard that any QBs are refusing to take the test, but I have read that agents are recommending that they don't. I think that's alarmist; Stroud went #2, which is basically what most people expected. Is it established that the scores hurt him? I'd say they did not. But I might not want a player I represent to be subjected to the media/Internet scrutiny, especially since it's clear that players pay attention to what's being said about them, and sometimes react to it.   To the bolded, if a team wants to use S2 results for planning, why can't they draft their QB, and then ask him to take the test? Now there's no pressure, he can test under controlled circumstances, and the team can use the data to help develop their player. 
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...