Big Ben accused of sexual assault

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by 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....

Ya know, I haven't got a clue. I would say, if they have enough to file a charge, then they would probably have enough to get the warrant. Other than that I don't know. Seems like if he admits to consensual happenings and isn't denying the act but only the consent, then why would DNA even matter?

And for the record, I am just going off of what's on the news, and basic knowledge, I'm not a lawyer or have any such experience to give substantial backing to my thoughts.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by 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.

well said, those seem like the 3 most likely options, only #1 would be possibly favorable for BR.

I doubt he had to give DNA in the last one since no criminal charges were filed, only civil if they even were.

[davy]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

but what ever happens his reputation is down the toilet.

Along with his DNA presumably.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well it's questionable if Roeth has common sense

It was a misake IMO for him to admit to the police his involvement to any extent. This is not his first time dealing with law enforcement, he should know what not to say. They're trying to decipher what happened between the time of any advancement on his part, and the time she fell and hit her head.

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Ya know, I haven't got a clue. I would say, if they have enough to file a charge, then they would probably have enough to get the warrant. Other than that I don't know. Seems like if he admits to consensual happenings and isn't denying the act but only the consent, then why would DNA even matter?

And for the record, I am just going off of what's on the news, and basic knowledge, I'm not a lawyer or have any such experience to give substantial backing to my thoughts.

credskins, your on point. they would need a warrant to take a DNA sample from ben unless he consents. of course, logic dictates that if they want a sample from ben they must have some dna fluid on the alleged victim to compare it to.

im guessin he was gettin head, (something happens), she hits her head.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

IF Rothlesberger is indicted, do you think the NFL and or the steelers would suspend him like they did Vick, or would they wait for more evidence and/or the result of the trial?

[over the mountain]

idk, that was an interesting point that radio heads have been talking about. vick being suspended after getting indicted set a precedent that, in a fair nfl world, should be applied to all players.

an indictment really shouldnt be the bench mark for when the nfl assumes guilt and takes action.

the joke from some famous judge is that he could get his ham sandwhich indicted. grand jury proceedings are jokes.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

credskins, your on point. they would need a warrant to take a DNA sample from ben unless he consents. of course, logic dictates that if they want a sample from ben they must have some dna fluid on the alleged victim to compare it to.

im guessin he was gettin head, (something happens), she hits her head.

for the location the appropriate phrase for (something happens) would have to be sh*t happens.

[Kalisto2010]

Originally Posted by 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?

Are you serious? Damn Ben this doesn't look good man..

[MTK]

Can you imagine if we find out he was getting a blumpkin?

lol

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

idk, that was an interesting point that radio heads have been talking about. vick being suspended after getting indicted set a precedent that, in a fair nfl world, should be applied to all players.

an indictment really shouldnt be the bench mark for when the nfl assumes guilt and takes action.

the joke from some famous judge is that he could get his ham sandwhich indicted. grand jury proceedings are jokes.

i could see there being a difference here. with vick, there was quite a bit of evidence against him and he had lied directly to the commish. In this case, there may not be as much direct evidence at the time if/when Big Ben is indicted. It really may come down to a he said / she said situation which should not be enough to warrant a suspension. with vick, it was he said / all these dead dogs on your property said.

Hopefully, there will actually be some hard evidence that either exhonorates or condemns Rothlesberger.

[Monkeydad]

Is he married?

[SolidSnake84]

To my knowledge Ben is not married.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Can you imagine if we find out he was getting a blumpkin?

lol

Gross and that would be one big blumpkin.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Kalisto2010

Are you serious? Damn Ben this doesn't look good man..

I think in the end he'll get off (no pun intended). There was alcohol involved and it's simply her word against his. He's lawyered up with a guy who helped Ray Lewis get away with murder. At this point it's her word against Ben's. I have no clue what legal precedent says about these kind of cases, but even if his DNA matches whatever evidence the cops already have, it's going to pretty difficult to prove (without reasonable doubt) that a sexual assault occurred.

Either way it's another huge hit to his image. At this point he's a scumbag in my eyes.