Big Ben accused of sexual assault

[SirClintonPortis]

Report: Roethlisberger admitted to having "sexual contact" with alleged victim | ProFootballTalk.com

Ok, so he knows the girl.

And "she fell on her head"? WTF?

[Mechanix544]

Report: Roethlisberger admitted to having "sexual contact" with alleged victim | ProFootballTalk.com


jeeeez, look at those comments from posters........

Everyone wants his head, so to speak, and noone really knows anything about what went on. Absolutely nothing, and they want him out of the league, banished, for what, being a horny 28 year old millionaire? Idiots, hopefully they will weed these easily swayed minds out if this ever goes to trial. F*cking sheep.

[SirClintonPortis]

I suppose rape should be legalized then, since horny males should just have their way.

Or maybe we should just have unisex restrooms, since, uh, well, you know, boys should have their way.

[Lotus]

Grab your wallet and settle as quickly and quietly as possible, Big Ben.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by Mechanix544

Report: Roethlisberger admitted to having "sexual contact" with alleged victim | ProFootballTalk.com


jeeeez, look at those comments from posters........

Everyone wants his head, so to speak, and noone really knows anything about what went on. Absolutely nothing, and they want him out of the league, banished, for what, being a horny 28 year old millionaire? Idiots, hopefully they will weed these easily swayed minds out if this ever goes to trial. F*cking sheep.

You know just as little as we do. He could have done this type of thing 15 times before and no one came forward until now. No one knows the truth and he was probably so shitfaced that he doesn't know what happened either. Are you really buying the, "Yeah, I banged her and then she hit her head and decided to claim rape" story? He never should have been allowed to make that statement. What an idiot.

Sure he is innocent until proven guilty but as a high profile athlete with a track record of moronic judgement, he has set himself up to be judged in the court of public opinion. It is "right"? Probably not, but that is reality.

You seem to be more closed minded and judgemental about this issue than the other posters. Just calm down and look at the information out there. Things aren't looking too good for Big Ben aka Frank the Tank.

Here is the life lesson that I have learned from this:

If you are a famous 28 year old multi-millionaire, it is bad idea to get hammered and screw a 20 year old college girl in a bathroom during a 5 bar tour in Nowheresville, Georgia.

Edit: Isn't it interesting how aggressive Ben and his legal team were against the first accuser? Seems like a different approach this time around. What is different???

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

You know just as little as we do. He could have done this type of thing 15 times before and no one came forward until now. No one knows the truth and he was probably so shitfaced that he doesn't know what happened either. Are you really buying the, "Yeah, I banged her and then she hit her head and decided to claim rape" story? He never should have been allowed to make that statement. What an idiot.

Sure he is innocent until proven guilty but as a high profile athlete with a track record of moronic judgement, he has set himself up to be judged in the court of public opinion. It is "right"? Probably not, but that is reality.

You seem to be more closed minded and judgemental about this issue than the other posters. Just calm down and look at the information out there. Things aren't looking too good for Big Ben aka Frank the Tank.

Here is the life lesson that I have learned from this:

If you are a famous 28 year old multi-millionaire, it is bad idea to get hammered and screw a 20 year old college girl in a bathroom during a 5 bar tour in Nowheresville, Georgia.
Edit: Isn't it interesting how aggressive Ben and his legal team were against the first accuser? Seems like a different approach this time around. What is different???

pretty freaking much

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

You know just as little as we do. He could have done this type of thing 15 times before and no one came forward until now. No one knows the truth and he was probably so shitfaced that he doesn't know what happened either. Are you really buying the, "Yeah, I banged her and then she hit her head and decided to claim rape" story? He never should have been allowed to make that statement. What an idiot.

Sure he is innocent until proven guilty but as a high profile athlete with a track record of moronic judgement, he has set himself up to be judged in the court of public opinion. It is "right"? Probably not, but that is reality.

You seem to be more closed minded and judgemental about this issue than the other posters. Just calm down and look at the information out there. Things aren't looking too good for Big Ben aka Frank the Tank.

Here is the life lesson that I have learned from this:

If you are a famous 28 year old multi-millionaire, it is bad idea to get hammered and screw a 20 year old college girl in a bathroom during a 5 bar tour in Nowheresville, Georgia.

Edit: Isn't it interesting how aggressive Ben and his legal team were against the first accuser? Seems like a different approach this time around. What is different???

No one "hit their head" the first time around.

[Bigreds77]

During football season a few of the Steelers go to the Wheeling Downs to gamble. From the stories that I have been told by the people that work there they say that Ben can be a a$$ sometimes.

[SolidSnake84]

If he isn't willing to provide a DNA sample, that right there proves he is guilty. If he is innocent, then he has nothing to worry about in submitting the sample.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

If he isn't willing to provide a DNA sample, that right there proves he is guilty. If he is innocent, then he has nothing to worry about in submitting the sample.

Nothing in life is that simple. First if they had consensual, his DNA would be there and it wouldn't prove anything really. Second, and this may sound paranoid, but once you give your DNA it goes into a Federal DB and, well, let's be honest some people just don't trust the govt that much. Finally, it may be on the advice of counsel that he doesn't, because the counsel knows that if it matches, even in consensual, it creates a prejudice.

It's along the lines of an innocent man not wanting to testify, only because his testimony has enough flaws that a good prosecutor will make his answers him sound guilty. That might be why the Bill of Rights included the defense against self-incrimination.

But DNA is SCIENCE, right Kowalski ;-)

[SolidSnake84]

So he can just refuse to submit to testing and that's that?

[skinsfan69]

this is a total mess for big ben. to me this sounds like some fooling around went a little too far. whether he is guily or innocent he really needs to try and settle this out of court as soon as possible. but what ever happens his reputation is down the toilet.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SolidSnake84

So he can just refuse to submit to testing and that's that?

No, he can be compelled if there is sufficient evidence, but it requires a warrant.

[SolidSnake84]

In your experience, do you think that they will get one?

Because Ben's lawyer Ed Garland pretty much said that they were not going to consent to a sample....

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Didnt Rothlesberger provide DNA the last time he was accused of sexual assault? If so, having his DNA on file with the government shouldnt be a concern. Hasn't he already admitted to having contact of some sort with his accuser? So how would any additional prejudice be created by providing a DNA sample here.

I can only think of a few possibilities:

1) His lawyer simply doesnt want to be overly cooperative. If they really want his DNA and the feel they have evidence, then the prosecutors SHOULD get a warrant. (However, I personally feel if you have nothing to hide, then why not be as cooperative as possible in an effort to clear your name?)

2) Rothlesberger admitted to having contact that did not constitute intercourse with the woman. If the woman shows evidence of being raped, then Rothlesbergers argument could be that someone else did it. However, if he provides his DNA and it matches, it would prove Rothlesberger is either lying about the nature of his encounter or he actually committed the crime he's being accused of.

3) Rothlesberger's DNA has never been taken by the government before. He doesn't want it on file because it could end up being a match to some other, as yet unprosecuted crime.