Super Bowl QB accused of sexual asault

Super Bowl QB accused of sexual asault

Ben Roethlisberger has been named a defendant in a sexual asault case. Details are sketchy right now, but his lawyer says he didn't do it.

Mikey, got an opinion on this one?

I don't understand why this is bad news or even shocking. I vote this get moved to the couch.

P.S. It's spelled "assault".

karmyn31 wrote:

Super Bowl QB accused of sexual asault

Ben Roethlisberger has been named a defendant in a sexual asault case. Details are sketchy right now, but his lawyer says he didn't do it.

Mikey, got an opinion on this one?

If he does, he's keeping it to himself for now.

JESUS CHRIST, THE ATTORNEY NAMED THE ALLEGED VICTIM?!

karmyn31 wrote:

his lawyer says he didn't do it.

Well DERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

and dear god the comments on that article

Do yourself a favor, Cyberwulf. Never read comments on any article on SI.com or NFL.com. Those people are nuts.

Or Youtube, or IMDb.

Or really 99.9% of the internet.

Quote :

the only thing worse the dog fighting is rape! Ben needs to be locked up 23 months, have his contract voided and be labled a monster by PETA....................

Even the people who aren't automatically assuming that this guy is innocent are total retards!

How is PETA the authority on labeling rapists?

And I love how rape is the ONLY THING WORSE than dogfighting. What?!

Cyberwulf wrote:

JESUS CHRIST, THE ATTORNEY NAMED THE ALLEGED VICTIM?!

They named the alleged perp. Equal treatment, fancy that.

gaijinguy wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

JESUS CHRIST, THE ATTORNEY NAMED THE ALLEGED VICTIM?!

They named the alleged perp. Equal treatment, fancy that.

Duh...sexual assault victims aren't named for fear that they'll be harrassed, abused and/or called a liar. They will have their entire life investigated, shat on, mocked and used as fodder for mysogynists/misandrists. If a man is the accuser he will likely be the target of homophobic violence; a woman will be either accused of 'being too ugly' to warrant such an act or being blamed for 'having lead him on' (which intensifies when the alleged perp is a celebrity). In short, naming the accuser in sexual assault crimes is a very bad thing to do, if not outright illegal.

Cyberwulf's outrage is absolutely warranted in this case. Fancy that.

The PETA thing is a reference to Michael Vick, who was just released from prison. It's still unknown if his suspension will be reversed. Personally, I think he needs to stay out.
As for Plaxico Buress, he's a great player, but needs serious mental help.
I'm waiting for TO to do something crazy again. Others are stealing his spotlight.

grmblfjx wrote:

How is PETA the authority on labeling rapists?

They're not much of an authority on anything...including animals.

I live in Pgh., and I hate Roethlisberger so much (he is a douche, he is irresponsible, and I hate football), but I will admit to being a little curious regarding the timing of the accusation. I can understand if it took a while because of emotional trauma and everything, but whether it's true or not, I feel like her lawyer might have timed it so he knew he would get the best deal out of everything.

I feel for the girl, though - putting her name and photos up online is putting her at huge risk, I know how crazy the fans of Roethlisberger are. They'll freak out if you don't like him, let alone if you accuse him of something like this. I am concerned for her.

Check out the comments here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] WARNING: AD HEAVY

Also the first thing I thought was ALL FOOTBALLERS ARE RAPISTS.

Criminal Probe Unlikely.

I fail to see how this ISN'T just a lady trying to get money.

Let's see, she doesn't file a criminal complaint at all, it takes her forever to file a civil suit, then blames everyone who said it didn't happen for covering it up.

Because really, it probably didn't happen, these people would be telling the truth, so naturally she'd have to say they're covering it up, because ONE party here has to be lying.

But hey, MAYBE there's real evidence that Big Ben raped her. Not just evidence that she WAS in his room, evidence that he actually raped her. But until I've heard it, he's innocent, and I'm skeptical about her motives.

It really sounds like she, as many Nevadaians (Nevadans? Nevadi?), is just trying to make a mortgage payment.

Also, I've been away at a qualifier, but I'm back now. So your that Mikey sized hole in your souls has once again been filled.

A_Note_Chaotic wrote:

Check out the comments here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] WARNING: AD HEAVY

Quote :

Rid Iculous said,




on July 22nd, 2009 at 12:34 pm

I agree with the earlier comment about if you are going
to rape someone at least make sure she’s hot. Rape against Andrea
wasn’t a crime, it’s a favor.
Men out there, this is proof that going “hoggin’” isn’t worth it.

Jesus. Hello Bile, my old bosom companion.

VB wrote:

A_Note_Chaotic wrote:

Check out the comments here: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] WARNING: AD HEAVY

Quote :

Rid Iculous said,




on July 22nd, 2009 at 12:34 pm

I agree with the earlier comment about if you are going
to rape someone at least make sure she’s hot. Rape against Andrea
wasn’t a crime, it’s a favor.
Men out there, this is proof that going “hoggin’” isn’t worth it.

Jesus. Hello Bile, my old bosom companion.

Seriously. It's disgusting.

Aggie wrote:

gaijinguy wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

JESUS CHRIST, THE ATTORNEY NAMED THE ALLEGED VICTIM?!

They named the alleged perp. Equal treatment, fancy that.

Duh...sexual assault victims aren't named for fear that they'll be harrassed, abused and/or called a liar. They will have their entire life investigated, shat on, mocked and used as fodder for mysogynists/misandrists. If a man is the accuser he will likely be the target of homophobic violence; a woman will be either accused of 'being too ugly' to warrant such an act or being blamed for 'having lead him on' (which intensifies when the alleged perp is a celebrity). In short, naming the accuser in sexual assault crimes is a very bad thing to do, if not outright illegal.

Cyberwulf's outrage is absolutely warranted in this case. Fancy that.

The key word is "crimes" - if this were a criminal case then the accuser's name should not be made public. In fact, there are numerous court rules and rules of practice laying that out.

However, this is a civil case. And it's a civil case in which the accuser is the plaintiff (as opposed to criminal matters, where it would be "The State of Nevada v. John Smith"). Under that scenario, her name has to be disclosed because she is the one filing the suit.

Spotts right on. Who gives a damn about Roth I cannot stand him. I'm all for the Steelers. Always have been but Ben can go jump off a cliff.

Polamalu on the other hand....mmmmmm :viley: (we really need a girl masturbation icon)

Spotts1701 wrote:

The key word is "crimes" - if this were a criminal case then the accuser's name should not be made public. In fact, there are numerous court rules and rules of practice laying that out.

However, this is a civil case. And it's a civil case in which the accuser is the plaintiff (as opposed to criminal matters, where it would be "The State of Nevada v. John Smith"). Under that scenario, her name has to be disclosed because she is the one filing the suit.

Ahhh, I was unaware of that. Thank you for the correction.

T.S.Orr wrote:

Polamalu on the other hand....mmmmmm :viley: (we really need a girl masturbation icon)

You mean this one?



Ok, on topic:

To summarize my two-hour argument with gai (yeah ):

I think the judicial system (bear with me regarding the fuzzy terms, yes?) should treat everyone the same, as in, if they decide to protect everyone's identities and someone's name gets leaked they will continue to protect everyone else's identity. You can't ask the law to go against its own rules just because some gossipy neighbor or so did.

He thinks the system should ensure equal outcome for all parties, as in, if one party's name gets leaked the court should then publish everyone else's name, because else that would be an unfair advantage to the other party.

Which, I think, is kindergarten logic à la "Mommy my ball was stolen but Timmy still has his, it's not fair, do something!!!"


The bit that we both agree on is that no names should be disclosed at all. You don't know until afterwards which party is the victim, and in either case they are going through enough trouble without having their privacy compromised on top of it.

T.S.Orr wrote:

Spotts right on. Who gives a damn about Roth I cannot stand him. I'm all for the Steelers. Always have been but Ben can go jump off a cliff.

Polamalu on the other hand....mmmmmm :viley: (we really need a girl masturbation icon)

Would you prefer Tommy Maddox still be the QB? :redangry: That guy was TERRIBLE. Big Ben may be dimwitted and goofy looking, but he doesn't make a habit of throwing four INTs a game. And he typically makes the plays he needs to make.

Also, you're missing about four commas.

Why did I bother? Why?