Matt Araiza Cleared of Gang-Rape at SDSU; Signed by Chiefs
- Thread starter sodenj5
- Start date
- Status
He was excluded from the criminal case as it was found he left the party an hour before the rape.
He was removed from the civil case as long as he agreed to remove his defamation countersuit. No money exchanged hands. Take from all that what you will.
Did I miss something?
He was removed from the civil case as long as he agreed to remove his defamation countersuit. No money exchanged hands. Take from all that what you will.
Did I miss something?
This is what I thought, too. Did I miss something or is this a case of allegations are front page anbove the fold and mea culpas are mixed into the classifieds? Honestly, maybe I missed something.
This case is probably an ideal example of why courts are the proper venue for adjudicating these matters, not Twitter or God knows what other places. There's almost always more than meets the eye, and it needs to be sussed out in an emotionless, fact-based manner.
There does appear to have been a sexual encounter between Araiza and the underaged girl earlier in the evening that she claimed was nonconsensual. I may have missed something but I don't believe he has denied that there was a sexual encounter. His defense was that it was consensual and he believed she was of age.
.
Having sex with someone isn't a crime. The accuser submitted video evidence to the deputy district attorney, whose response was, ""In looking at the videos on the sex tape, I absolutely cannot prove any forceable sexual assault based upon what happened." There is also video evidence that Araiza was not at the scene when this alleged rape took place.
That means the only thing that should worry anyone is if she was underage.
If you think this is simply kids defending their friend (Araiza), there was also a video submitted to police that showed the accuser lying about her age on camera during a different party the night before the alleged rape.
I'm having a hard time finding proof that Araiza was anything but a victim of losing years off of his career.
I believe the only video is from later in the night but I could wrong.
I don't think the prosecutor saying he can't prove forceable sexual assault based on the video is definitive proof but in regards to Araiza, that is largely irrelevant anyway since his sexual encounter was earlier in the night.
Excellent point about her telling others she was 18. That certainly helps support Araiza assertion that he believes he to be 18. Even so still leaves open, imo, the question of whether it was consensual or if she was even sober enough to consent.
Either way, I'm not sure I'd call a 22 year old who had sex with a 17 year old who had been drinking as a victim because his dream job got delayed temporarily.
I don't think the prosecutor saying he can't prove forceable sexual assault based on the video is definitive proof but in regards to Araiza, that is largely irrelevant anyway since his sexual encounter was earlier in the night.
Excellent point about her telling others she was 18. That certainly helps support Araiza assertion that he believes he to be 18. Even so still leaves open, imo, the question of whether it was consensual or if she was even sober enough to consent.
Either way, I'm not sure I'd call a 22 year old who had sex with a 17 year old who had been drinking as a victim because his dream job got delayed temporarily.
USA Today
The dude will most likely forever be known as a rapist. I mean, look at your post - "Even so still leaves open, imo, the question of whether it was consensual or if she was even sober enough to consent." His accuser also stated:
Theres no room for confusion here. Araiza raped her in a yard, baited her into a bedroom where a group of men were waiting to rape her, and then threw her onto the bed so she could be raped...except theres video evidence he had been gone for at least an hour before the incident transpired. Oops. Guess she just misremembered an entire hour prior to the event and then a guy that looked nothing like Araiza (the DA stated nobody matched his description in the video they viewed) led her to that room. Tough shit for that probable rapist, Araiza!
There isn't any evidence of guilt by Araiza. There also appears to be a decent chunk of evidence that supports his innocence. Yet there are thousands of people who feel the same way you do: "Theres a question of whether the sex was consensual." Is there?
- She lied about Araiza leading her to a bedroom.
- She lied about Araiza throwing her onto a bed.
- She announced at a party the night before - on video - that she was 18. Multiple witnesses said she did the same that night.
- She told her friend - after having sex with Araiza but before the incident - that she had sex with someone (presumably Araiza) at the party. She was sober enough to recall the encounter and she also treated it as a consensual one (a stark contrast to her immediate depiction of the event that happened after).
- Araiza called the accuser a few days later after finding out he may have an STD, and told her to get checked. Not something I would generally think someone does to their rape victims.
- SD Police/prosecutors issued a dozen warrants, investigated for hundreds of hours, and provided a 200 page detailed transcript of why there were no criminal charges. Many sexual assault crimes are barely looked into. This was not one of them.
- He was dropped from the civil case, with the only request that he drop his own counter suit.
#BelieveWomen indeed.
Last edited:
It’s so weird that we’ve landed in this place in American society where having a penis makes you an innate liar until proven otherwise and having a vagina makes you an innate truth-teller unless proven otherwise.
I’ve lived all over the country. In my experience I’ve seen roughly an equal split of shittiness and dishonesty across the genitalia spectrum (however you define it). Yet for some reason so many people that would normally apply logic and reason with a steady hand across most issues constantly land on “penis = lies, vagina = truth!”
In a world of endless complexity even the smartest among us find temptation in neat little boxes.
The mind reels.
I’ve lived all over the country. In my experience I’ve seen roughly an equal split of shittiness and dishonesty across the genitalia spectrum (however you define it). Yet for some reason so many people that would normally apply logic and reason with a steady hand across most issues constantly land on “penis = lies, vagina = truth!”
In a world of endless complexity even the smartest among us find temptation in neat little boxes.
The mind reels.
There was a long period of time when sexual abuse towards women went unreported, unbelieved, and under punished. (Many would argue that there's still much work to be done.) When rectifying an abhorrent situation such as this, the course correction can sometimes be an overcorrection. Believe all women, no matter the facts, is an example of that. As is failing to admit when we assumed a man's guilt and were wrong.
At the very least, we could change the title of this thread to, "Matt Araiza Cleared of Gang-Rape at SDSU; Signed by Chiefs."
Yeah. I get it. And agree that the *attention* women as a whole needed to have brought to sexual abuse was warranted.
But man, we all need to be better and just consider giving things like nuance and our legal system a chance again.
So basically, there's still an active prosecution of a gang rape, only that it didn't directly involve Araiza? I'm getting a little lost here.
This is complete bullshit and nowhere near reality. Araiza, if he is innocent (and it still seems like he may have had sex with a drunk, underage girl), is an extreme outlier as far as men being falsely accused for sexual assault. GTFO with this incel/men's rights garbage.
That period of time is still very much the present.
Me? I haven't been following closely, but it sounds like the DA was able to rule him out from the gang rape through video surveillance - that works for me. But he admitted to having "consensual" sex with a 17 yo. I have a lot of issues with that, and think he's probably lucky to escape any charges.
Regardless though, it's @Arroyoyo nonsense about how men are now victims deemed innate liars getting busted on fake accusations. Does it ever happen? Sure. Is it remotely close to the amount of unreported and unpunished sexual assaults on women? Not fucking at all, and it's an attitude that further discourages women from speaking out.
I think it's very unfortunate that Araiza was innocent of the gang rape and had his entire world turned upside down, but I agree that the take above about men being the victims now is nonsense and I'm glad somebody called it out with facts. (I'll drop it now though because this obviously isn't the place for that discussion.)
Last edited:
Wait.
It’s 2024, I’m a near 40-year-old man that has been in a long-term relationship for the vast majority of his adult life, and someone on the internet just called me an incel and claimed I was crying about men’s rights to suggest we don’t accuse people of rape until we know they’ve actually raped someone because it’s devastating to falsely accuse another human of that.
I guess we’re Reddit now. Hah.
There are no amount of “rereads” of your post that are going to make it come across as anything less than a (definitely low-brow) Twitter-or-Reddit type of emotionally-unhinged rant.
If it made you feel good to say all of that I’m happy for you if it didn’t I’m sorry you feel that way. Onward.
If it made you feel good to say all of that I’m happy for you if it didn’t I’m sorry you feel that way. Onward.
I’ve been sexually assaulted by a woman who was a relative, a trans man during a pride event, and a former boss who, when I didn’t reciprocate, tried to fire me.
If you think genitalia determines whether someone is to be believed or not, or suspected or not, you’re a fool that forgets upvotes aren’t a feature here.
Am I aware one gender has historically had a much larger uphill battle to climb regarding being “believed?” Absolutely.
But as someone that’s seen the ugly side - in many, many instances - of humanity regardless of gender, leave the hero-boarding in 2016, please.
If you think genitalia determines whether someone is to be believed or not, or suspected or not, you’re a fool that forgets upvotes aren’t a feature here.
Am I aware one gender has historically had a much larger uphill battle to climb regarding being “believed?” Absolutely.
But as someone that’s seen the ugly side - in many, many instances - of humanity regardless of gender, leave the hero-boarding in 2016, please.
You could just read what percentage of sexual assaults go unpunished or unreported and what percentage of accusations prove false and figure out where the actual problem lies.
And here I was thinking your shitty takes would cease with Bill fired.
Fuck off, honestly.
Sorry this all happened to you, mean that legitimately. But really no need for the well, ackshually game your initial post was
How do you possibly calculate what percentage of sexual assaults go unreported? Oh, that’s right, you model.
Let me ask you: do you think any of my instances of sexual assaults were reported? They’re reflected in the statistics?
Actually, the one at work was reported, and she resigned but only because at that point she had done the same to half a dozen other men. So she did it FIVE other times a KEPT her job.
The trans dude? Grab my balls when I bent over into my car to grab a pride flag. Ran over from the sidewalk.
My friends? All of whom I worked with on the HRC campaign? Laughed. Thought it was hilarious.
Again, yes, one gender clearly has had more of an uphill battle. But stop hero-boarding because your view is narrow and you’re too steeped and invested in it to take a broader view of what happens in this world.
Aren’t you proving my point? You were assaulted and didn’t report it. It happens constantly, everywhere. And every now and then a guy is falsely accused - often after putting themselves in a bad situation like fucking a drunk 17 year old. You for whatever reason empathized more with the latter.
Look at this hero. Goes all the way to the internet to bury Araiza, who did nothing wrong. So brave.
She announced she was 18. You guys like glossing over that because without it your brand of hero-boarding doesn’t work.
Nobody’s trying to be a hero. You came in here with a diatribe, I’m just cooking dinner and a little grossed out. But we can leave it at that.
KFP’s post outlining the timeline and evidence and what that does or doesn’t mean about Araiza’s guilt is fine. I don’t know if Matt Araiza is a shithead or not and if people want to deep dive on whether his case has been fairly or unfairly represented in the media, I don’t see anything wrong with that.
Using Araiza (who just got signed by the best team in football) as some kind of gotcha on how women can be liars too and actually men are kind of oppressed now and the state of male/female dynamics in accountability and reporting is completely different. And sucks.
Last edited:
Cooking dinner!? It’s 10:30!
This is why you continue to be one of my favorite posters.
That's fine, but she was still 17. He may very well be innocent from a legal standard (I have no idea, I'm not a lawyer), but I still find his behavior gross at best. If everything was consensual as he states, it is certainly unfortunate. But provided he's as skilled as mentioned, he's still going to end up making a lot of money in the NFL. I'm not going lose any sleep over his travails.
I think this is an unbelievably complex and difficult societal issue. This place prides itself (with good reason, imho) on fair and balanced discourse. It would be nice if we could have a nuanced and intelligent discussion about sexual assault/consent/underreporting/false reporting, etc without resorting to insults and name calling. I would really like to have that convo w/ the smart people on this board. Lawyers especially due to the obvious legalities involved. An area in which I am generally ignorant. I respect the opinions of (almost) all of you.
I have had the all too common duty to assess/examine/report/treat victims of sexual assault/date rape/illicit doping, etc, etc. It's an absolutely awful, disheartening, degrading interaction for all involved. These are among the most heartbreaking and infuriating cases we see in US EDs. Only child abuse is worse. And burns. And scabies - I digress.
These cases take entire families down a terrible path that can lead to mental illness, substance abuse and suicide. There is credible evidence that a large percentage of women who report somatization disorders, mental health issues, conversion disorders, suicidal ideation have, in fact, been sexually assaulted - many times as a prepubescent. It's horrible to consider. That is an undeniable and tragic consequence of many of these cases.
My own experience as a clinician has taught me to "trust but verify". That may sound overly harsh/cynical but I get conned by a certain percentage of my patients every day. I see a segment of the population some of you do not. I see the broken, mentally ill, IV drug abusers, sex workers, criminals, homeless, addled, unloved, unwashed...every day. It might surprise some of you that a certain percentage of these cases are complete and obvious fabrications. Often the accuser is mentally ill or has some sort of other secondary gain. In our trust but verify model, these cases get worked up and police reports are filed. If a woman says she was choked we get a CT angiogram (which is NOT a totally benign study - it is potentially invasive w/ lots of radiation dosed into sensitive tissues of the neck, thyroid) even without ANY physical evidence or bruising/voice changes/stridor, etc. So, we DO trust. But we verify also. The Sexual Assault Nurse Exam team (I'm part of it - as the treating doc) is known as the SANE team. They are the most dedicated and compassionate group of nurses you will ever work or see in action professionally. They are fervent victim advocates. They deal with the worst possible cases including child sexual assault. In short, they are superstars who move mountains to advocate for their patients. I'm in awe of them. They will occasionally come out of interview and literally roll their eyes and say, "This one is BS". That is my own personal small "n" and in no way represents the very real and undeniable statistics regarding sexual assault in the US.
I can't help but (as a man and father of a young son) wonder about the long term effects of accusation. I keenly agree with others above that the numbers are in no way comparable w/r/t # of incidents or the associated trauma. But if it's YOU or YOUR son implicated, that "n" becomes your whole world. It seems some context, sensitivity and understanding could be added to these important discussions? That should, in my opinion, in NO WAY ameliorate the scourge of toxic masculinity of the the clear preponderance of male sexual violence.
I am not spoiling for a fight. I am hoping to spark some helpful dialogue. I think it's an important issue and I would very much like to hear everyone's thoughts - in a polite and respectful manner!
I have had the all too common duty to assess/examine/report/treat victims of sexual assault/date rape/illicit doping, etc, etc. It's an absolutely awful, disheartening, degrading interaction for all involved. These are among the most heartbreaking and infuriating cases we see in US EDs. Only child abuse is worse. And burns. And scabies - I digress.
These cases take entire families down a terrible path that can lead to mental illness, substance abuse and suicide. There is credible evidence that a large percentage of women who report somatization disorders, mental health issues, conversion disorders, suicidal ideation have, in fact, been sexually assaulted - many times as a prepubescent. It's horrible to consider. That is an undeniable and tragic consequence of many of these cases.
My own experience as a clinician has taught me to "trust but verify". That may sound overly harsh/cynical but I get conned by a certain percentage of my patients every day. I see a segment of the population some of you do not. I see the broken, mentally ill, IV drug abusers, sex workers, criminals, homeless, addled, unloved, unwashed...every day. It might surprise some of you that a certain percentage of these cases are complete and obvious fabrications. Often the accuser is mentally ill or has some sort of other secondary gain. In our trust but verify model, these cases get worked up and police reports are filed. If a woman says she was choked we get a CT angiogram (which is NOT a totally benign study - it is potentially invasive w/ lots of radiation dosed into sensitive tissues of the neck, thyroid) even without ANY physical evidence or bruising/voice changes/stridor, etc. So, we DO trust. But we verify also. The Sexual Assault Nurse Exam team (I'm part of it - as the treating doc) is known as the SANE team. They are the most dedicated and compassionate group of nurses you will ever work or see in action professionally. They are fervent victim advocates. They deal with the worst possible cases including child sexual assault. In short, they are superstars who move mountains to advocate for their patients. I'm in awe of them. They will occasionally come out of interview and literally roll their eyes and say, "This one is BS". That is my own personal small "n" and in no way represents the very real and undeniable statistics regarding sexual assault in the US.
I can't help but (as a man and father of a young son) wonder about the long term effects of accusation. I keenly agree with others above that the numbers are in no way comparable w/r/t # of incidents or the associated trauma. But if it's YOU or YOUR son implicated, that "n" becomes your whole world. It seems some context, sensitivity and understanding could be added to these important discussions? That should, in my opinion, in NO WAY ameliorate the scourge of toxic masculinity of the the clear preponderance of male sexual violence.
I am not spoiling for a fight. I am hoping to spark some helpful dialogue. I think it's an important issue and I would very much like to hear everyone's thoughts - in a polite and respectful manner!
This is such a fucked up response.
He had sex with a girl that he thought was legal age and that wanted to have sex with him.
There's so much to unpack with your post, but I'm genuinely curious - what about his behavior was "gross"?
Thank you for the work you do and the thoughtful post. This place is (mostly) awesome.
Or there is nuance and not a simple, single problem.
Accusations should not be enough to destroy somebody. The real problem is not nearly so simple. People are discussing an individual case here.
https://evawintl.org/best_practice_faqs/false-reports-percentage/
The above info notes an allegation is considered false only if investigated and found to have not happened. So any accusations with the wrong person accused, or that contained no evidence or shaky, weak evidence are not counted. So that 2-8% of accusations are proven to have not happened is not nothing. That advocates will ignorantly or dishonestly state things like 99% or even 98% of allegations are true, and supported by evidence when it just means (at the lowest) 1 in 50 (more likely 1-25) assaults certainly didn't even happen. And that an unknown, certainly larger number did not happen, or have the wrong culprit. The methodology of these studies show seem to indicate to guilty until innocent approach, at least to the statistics. If you read the study pretty clear that 10% is very safe (though probably higher) number of people accused of sexual assault who certainly didn't do it.
Do you have any other crimes you suggest we simply look at the stats and decide it is safe enough to ignore the small chance the accused is innocent?
- Status