Discussion in 'Soccer' started by Theokritos, Oct 1, 2018.
Is there a less random time for this sort of thing to come up though?
I mean, having read that, it's hard to judge right now...
That story came up a few years ago and disappeared for whatever reason.
On one hand, innocent until proven guilty and there's been a lot examples of people being exonerated of these kind of accusations before (Kobe Bryant comes to mind).
On the other hand, there're countless more examples of people in power abusing and harassing women and women having to stay quiet and suffer, completely powerless and just stay traumatized with no help or vindication.
I respect "Ronaldo the football player", but if he do this, he can f**k right off.
But like I said, not judging atm, we don't know nearly enough to have a stand on this IMO.
I have no trouble believing he did this but I have a lot of trouble believing that anything will come of it
Der Spiegel apparently has a long history of investigative journalism. That article looks well put together and it really looks damning.
From my perspective, I'm curious why someone would agree to a settlement and ask for an NDA if they didn't do it. I also find it curious when she quotes him with that "99%" remark which seems rather random to be made up.
I don't see the relevance of this not being the first time the same media outlet has "tried to push" this story. If they think it's true based on their evidence then there's nothing wrong with reporting on it again.
That's a very personal decision for someone to make, but I would never make it lightly. I don't know for sure if a certain nominee for the Supreme Court did what was alleged of him, but based on everything I've seen, heard and read I know what I think he was capable of. I also know his reaction goes even further in my forming my opinion of him and what he's alleged to have done.
A lot of famous/rich people settle out of court and get NDAs to avoid media speculation like this. It's sad, but in today's day and age it doesn't matter if you're innocent or not just the mention or accusation of something like that going public can heavily taint your reputation.
Tell that to Jagr.
Many celebrities does not care.
I'll mention it the next time we're having a casual chat.
While, there's some truth to that... Varly took it stride and he clearly didn't do anything wrong. Others as well Doughty had a similar issue I believe. Even the fact that I vaguely remember something but not really says something.
Kane too he was clearly innocent as well.
Yeah I'm not saying everyone does, just that it has been noted in many articles that it's not an uncommon practice. I think a lot of it has to do with the legal representation, the situation and the way things can look.
Either way this case specifically all the information that has been provided to the public, including sealed documents (if legitimate), make it look very much like guilt/hush money though. Maybe there's something we don't know though.
Basically it comes down to if that first questionairre is legit. If Ronaldo did actually say that she said stop multiple times he’ll get/should into some legal trouble. If it’s fake then, well this will all disappear rather quickly I’d imagine.
I agree partly, but on the contrary, I'm also curious as to why women agree to a settlement and NDA with their alleged abusers, when they could potentially prevent it from happening to more women in the future. I guess that many women in that situation believe (rightfully so) it's too tough to prove the abuser's guilt and it's not worth the trouble of dealing with public scorn from fans of the abuser. It's just something hard to fully understand as someone not in that situation.
Either way, I'm all for waiting to see how the investigation unfolds before making any judgments.
Is the term "non consensual sex" what was used in the headline? I know the situation isn't funny but I couldn't help but laugh at them using a total euphemism for "rape".
Because most humans care about themselves first, and their families, and only then - maybe - about changing the world.
Because if you're up against someone rich and powerful, you will have your name, character and past dragged through the mud.
Whatever happened in that room with Ronaldo, she'll have the tape showing them having a good time in that club shown a million times, and asked why she went up to his room in the first place. They'll do everything to portrait her as a gold digger and someone trying to milk him for money, and regardless of how this imaginary trial went, it would be rough for her.
(I mean, women have the right to go people's rooms and change their mind, but you get the picture as to what kind of questions would come)
Not saying Ronaldo is guilty or not, I have no idea, none of us do - but just describing why it's difficult for women to pursue this.
I mean, the other day the US president was making fun of a woman who was potentially destroying her life testifying about how she was molested.
You should fix the formatting but I agree with you completely.
If anything wrong happened to her, she should have indicted him as soon as possible. Taking money from Ronaldo for 9 years and then suddenly decide to make it public speaks volumes about her character. I don't buy for a second the idea that she was somehow being traumatized by the event and it took her nine years to finally speak up. Also not sure what consensual sex is supposed to mean in this case. You're a hot chick that spends a night partying with a football star in a bar, both of you get drunk (at the very least), then you go to his hotel room with him. What exactly do you expect he wants to do with you there, discussing early Romantic poetry?
I mean... Dude... Women (and men, for that matter, humans and all kinds of land mammals) have to right to change their mind.
Just because she went up to his room and then maybe changed her mind, doesn't mean she lost the right to say no.
Again, I'm not talking about Ronaldo in particular, but in general.
(1) It's hard to charge, indict, or convict these crimes in criminal court. Accusers are always informed of this.
(2) If it's a case of both parties having consenting to sex and then one retracting that consent but the other persisting- it is rape. But that is incredibly hard to prove and no evidence short of witnesses or a recording can establish that.
(3) She filed a civil suit because the burden of proof is lower and it is an established form justice. OJ was acquitted in the criminal case, found culpable in the civil case.
(4) Her current lawyer claims the terms of her initial settlement were unfair and possibly illegal and unenforceable. She's not just speaking up now, she spoke up then and had a deal and recently was informed her deal wasn't good and wants to correct that.
(5) Consent is consent. I understand that one should expect that things would get sexual in that circumstance, it is absolutely implied, but (forgetting about convictions and the law here) if someone doesn't want to have sex and they express that they shouldn't be forced or coerced or made felt beholden into it. That's a very clear and simple red line. Alcohol complicates things so that's why everybody says No Means No. Women should feel empowered enough to say no (even when they fear for a violent or bad reaction) and men should understand that No means they should stop for that moment and reassess the situation with humanity and humility. Sometimes a girl says no but wants to keep being pursued - that's definitely a thing that happens - but a no is a no.
People like you are one of the reasons why more women don’t come forward or choose to settle privately.
Yup. About everything.
Ronaldo not a part of the Portuguese NT anymore, apparently they do take the allegations seriously.
Cristiano Ronaldo não volta a jogar por Portugal em 2018
He asked not to be called until 2019, similar to Messi.
Nothing to do with the allegations. Not really hard to check either.
You should read the report:
There is a recording of Mayorga's call to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department at 2:16 p.m. on June 13, 2009. (...) The police officer who spoke with Mayorga noted that the caller was extremely distraught and did not want to provide the name of the alleged perpetrator. All she would say is that it was a "public figure" and an "athlete." (...) The report also notes that the police arrived at the Mayorgas' home shortly after 2:30 p.m. on that Saturday afternoon. They radioed back to headquarters on several occasions, where an officer noted that the alleged victim wanted to go to the hospital for a rape kit examination, which is performed on victims of sexual violence to secure evidence and to examine and photograph possible injuries.
The police brought Mayorga to the University Medical Center just before 4 p.m. The CAD report notes that at 5:15 p.m., she had offered vague information about the alleged scene of the crime, saying that it was a hotel "near" Flamingo Road, where the hotel Palms Place is located. "They kept trying to make me say his name. And I was like 'I'm not going to say his name,'" says Mayorga. They also wanted to know where it had happened, but she was scared of providing too many details. (...) Under the category reserved for the type of attack, the nurse noted "patient's rectum penetrated" and that ejaculation had occurred "in assailant's hands. (...)
She says she then engaged a lawyer. The police "told her she was going to have all these hospital bills and medical bills" if she didn't say his name, says [her mother] Cheryl. A friend recommended a lawyer named Mary Smith, whose name has been changed for this story. At the time, she had a small practice in Las Vegas. The Mayorgas describe Smith as friendly and kind-hearted. Looking back, though, they think it was a big mistake not to have contacted a lawyer with more experience in such matters.
The lawyer advised her to make a complete statement to the police. And two or three weeks later, Mayorga estimates, a police officer came and recorded her statement. As part of this statement, she also mentioned Ronaldo's name. "I printed out pictures of him. Because the guy didn't know who he was." (...) The officer, she says, was an older man. When she told him that she had kissed Ronaldo in the bathroom, she says, the officer reacted by saying: "'Uh-oh, that's going to be a problem, that's going to be a problem!' And he's like: 'Well, just so you know, you getting an attorney, that doesn't look good,'" Mayorga recalls. "He was just like reaming me. And I said, 'My parents told me to get the attorney!'" She adds: "I didn't know what to do. I'm trying to hide this! I didn't really want this out."
In the end, she pleaded with the police officer to do nothing with her statement, saying that she still needed some time and that she wasn't emotionally stable. He promised her, she says, to wait until she was ready. From that point on, Mayorga was trapped in this dilemma: On the one hand, she didn't want to go public with her name or his. On the other, she wanted justice. Her lawyer, she says, then proposed clearing up everything out of court.
"He tried to take my underwear off. I turned away from him and curled up into a ball. And I was holding my vagina. And that's when he jumped on me." She says she said "no, no, no, no." Ronaldo, Kathryn Mayorga claims, raped her anally. Without a condom. Without lubricant.
Ronaldo's own statement from the September 2009 questionnaire: "She said no and stop several times."
Spoken like true entitled spoiled boy
Yes, rape is hard to prove at courts and rightfully so. One false accusation can absolutely destroy a person's life. But still, there were lots of people accused and inculpated of this crime at criminal courts so that she could very well go this route. She didn't do it and opted for civil settlement which in my view means that she felt she didn't have enough evidence for criminal indiction, and it was also more favorable for Ronaldo to keep her silent so that this case don't threaten his sponsorship deals and public image.
Now, she comes back after 9 years and makes it public, calling her initial settlement "unfair". Which in my translation means that she wants more money. Hard to me to feel much sympathy towards her.
Regarding No. 5: She's a former model, she probably had a ton of prior experience with men (be it at parties or in their bedrooms). Her suggestions that she believed someone like Cristiano Ronaldo would want to spend a night at a bar with her and then in a hotel room... with no sex involved... sound extremely implausible to me. You say that 1) sometimes a girl says no but wants to keeep being pursued; 2) a no is a no. I think these two propositions are contradicting each other. There's something primeval, incalculable in sexual relationships, and people should not be expecting to master it totally within the rigid confines of a legal framework. And treat it as a sort of a business agreement with two (or more) completely rational, deliberately acting sides. There's a certain grey zone when it comes to these things, and it strikes me as very odd that - given the lack of details in this particular case and the infamous history of money grabbing "rape" suits against rich and famous people, especially in the U.S. - people are siding so easily with this woman. I get that Ronaldo is rather unlikeable but come on.
I wonder, provided the documents from Ronaldo's lawyers aren't fake, can they even be used at court, as they were leaked?
Again, I have a hard time believing this whole story of a shy, modest former model who had no idea what Ronaldo wants to do with her at his hotel room, and who needed 9 years to find the courage and speak publicly. She "didn't really want this out" and go to the criminal court in 2009 but in 2018, she speaks to German journalists and gives them details about what he was doing with her vagina and whatnot? Sounds legit.
A version that seems a lot more likely to me: the two had a rough sex. Maybe she had planned it all and had an intention to get him to bed, then accuse him and get some money from him. Maybe not. After that night, she knew she didn't have evidence to get him convicted of rape at criminal court and she issued a civil suit to get some cash which Ronaldo gladly paid because it was pocket money by his standards and he didn't want any negative publicity. Now she's back and wants more money. I'm not going to side with her just because she's a woman and Ronaldo is a rich prick.
A rape is a very serious crime and should be treated accordingly: at courts (though the American system with civil courts makes rich and famous people with sponsorship deals really vulnerable to dubious accusations) . It should not be treated in the traditional media, neither should it be treated on Twitter. Some journalists in Europe have obviously been trying to bring the #MeToo movement over here, with a moderate success in France and with marginal success in Germany. I'm indeed far from a fan of this, the whole movement looks to me like a mixture of the worst traits of today's America (prudish, overly sensitive relationship to sexuality & hysterization and dumbing-down of public discourse). It also makes debates toxic, labeling anyone who expresses doubts and refuses to join the lynching crowd as a brute and misogynic enemy of humanity.
Lmfao let's just take a nuclear f***ing bomb to this thread
EDIT: I'd like to clarify that I am posting in response to the multiple shitshow comments from ol'Rexy, who I have never seen on this board before and will probably never appear here again.
Separate names with a comma.