Cristiano Ronaldo’s off the pitch troubles

[brendanb50]

Case officially reopened in the States

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45712777

Very bad situation for him based on the info in Der Spiegel - potentially breached the terms of his own hush money agreement and also completed a questionnaire stating that the victim said no multiple times, whilst also admitting to having sex with her.

Either way with the case reopening - he has some very public explaining to do

 

[Saoirse]

Very bad situation for him based on the info in Der Spiegel - potentially breached the terms of his own hush money agreement and also completed a questionnaire stating that the victim said no multiple times, whilst also admitting to having sex with her.

Either way with the case reopening - he has some very public explaining to do

Yep. IF that article is correct and the questionnaire is legally permissable evidence in Nevada then he's in a lot of trouble. From my reading of the law there rape is punishable by life imprisonment, and at the court's discretion this may be without the possibility of parole. The "standard" sentence if no "substantial bodily harm" results from the rape would be life with the possibility of parole after 10 years (which unlike in the UK is faaaar from guarenteed).

 

[brendanb50]

Yep. IF that article is correct and the questionnaire is legally permissable evidence in Nevada then he's in a lot of trouble. From my reading of the law there rape is punishable by life imprisonment, and at the court's discretion this may be without the possibility of parole.

Oh of course - the questionnaire itself is probably questionable in terms of evidence at best - but shows a degree of inconsistency in his story.

I'm very much behind backing someone as innocent until proven otherwise but these types of practices (paying off, legal bullying etc.) are morally wrong and ultimately raise more questions when they come to light.

The only hope for the accused is that the situation goes away forever but this seems incredibly naive to say the least but look at recent events to see how many people and their expensive lawyers felt this was perfectly viable.

 

[DJS]

Where am I missing about a questionnaire being completed?

Looked at links and couldn’t see it.

This all seems very dodgy, especially as Ronaldo did make a payment to her.

 

[Saoirse]

Where am I missing about a questionnaire being completed?

Looked at links and couldn’t see it.

This all seems very dodgy, especially as Ronaldo did make a payment to her.

It's in the Der Spiegel article, on it's second page if I remember rightly.

(They're the only ones who went in big on this story: others presumably worried about legal repercussions)

 

[Tucker]

Paying someone off is never a good look, doesn’t mean he’s guilty though. He’s a high profile guy, and allegations like this early in his career would have been quite damaging. If he were innocent, you can’t blame his lawyers from recommending he pay the accuser off and just get on with his life.

If that questionnaire is real though, and she did say no several times, then he deserves to have the book thrown at him.

 

[DJS]

Just read the full article.

Seems pretty damning to me, especially if he did make the comments in September 2009 where he admitted she said no and stop.

 

[Shadydan]

I feel the thread title is somewhat misleading.

 

[JCRD]

I know I'm going to go off tangent but I hate stories like the one with Ronaldo - I mean has it even been proved? is he guilty? It is some woman's accusation (potentially looking for a payday - who knows). What stops anyone going to the papers to tarnish people without any grounds etc

There have been far too many stories recently with people being accused of something when they have been found innocent - in turn mud sticks unfortunately and can ruin people.

Anyways mini rant over

 

[Saoirse]

I know I'm going to go off tangent but I hate stories like the one with Ronaldo - I mean has it even been proved? is he guilty? It is some woman's accusation (potentially looking for a payday - who knows). What stops anyone going to the papers to tarnish people without any grounds etc

There have been far too many stories recently with people being accused of something when they have been found innocent - in turn mud sticks unfortunately and can ruin people.

Anyways mini rant over

I think the bit in bold is the crux of the problem. In very, very few cases has anybody been found innocent. They have been found Not Guilty. Which doesn't mean they didn't do it, but that it can't be proven they did. Rape is a notoriously difficult crime to successfully prosecute, and there are a LOT of rapists who never see any consequence for it. This shouldn't be used effectively to pressure people not to speak out, especially when that so often results in their claims being further substantiated by others in high-profile cases. It's certainly awful to be falsely accused, but it is far less common than it is to be raped and never see any justice for it.

 

[sausage]

I think the bit in bold is the crux of the problem. In very, very few cases has anybody been found innocent. They have been found Not Guilty. Which doesn't mean they didn't do it, but that it can't be proven they did.

That sounds a lot like opinion, though. You can't imply someone is guilty when they haven't been found guilty. Innocent until otherwise proven is the law, and in many cases quite rightly so.


The fact is, people who make false claims are the majority of the issue. It trivialises genuine cases, and desensitises the issue so that "rape" becomes a weapon of regret for far too many claims; so much so, that it should be a jailable offence to make false accusations, as it can destroy careers (John Leslie springs to mind here).

 

[JCRD]

I think the bit in bold is the crux of the problem. In very, very few cases has anybody been found innocent. They have been found Not Guilty. Which doesn't mean they didn't do it, but that it can't be proven they did. Rape is a notoriously difficult crime to successfully prosecute, and there are a LOT of rapists who never see any consequence for it. This shouldn't be used effectively to pressure people not to speak out, especially when that so often results in their claims being further substantiated by others in high-profile cases. It's certainly awful to be falsely accused, but it is far less common than it is to be raped and never see any justice for it.

Reporting something you experienced is fine, I have no problem with that ofcourse, its the going to the media that I have a problem with especially as nothing has been proven yet. I also appreciate that just because someone hasnt been found guilty doesnt necessarily mean they are innocent - but that is our justice system. Surely someone needs to go through that route before being reported by the media - just feels like this is trial by the public and media rather than the justice system.

What stops someone tomorrow going to the media about Kane, or anyone else for that matter? It is very dangerous ground. And lets be honest, I highly doubt the media are going to validate the story before reporting it - it sells papers etc

On another note - I also abhor that someone falsely accuses someone with a blatantly lies yet her identity is hidden with the accused who has had his life shattered is plastered all over the papers. There have been a few recent cases where this has happened - wasnt one of those cases to do with the police not submitting texts as evidence that basically evidences the 'victim' as having lied?

 

[Saoirse]

That sounds a lot like opinion, though. You can't imply someone is guilty when they haven't been found guilty. Innocent until otherwise proven is the law, and in many cases quite rightly so.


The fact is, people who make false claims are the majority of the issue. It trivialises genuine cases, and desensitises the issue so that "rape" becomes a weapon of regret for far too many claims; so much so, that it should be a jailable offence to make false accusations, as it can destroy careers (John Leslie springs to mind here).

It already is. The thing I'm getting at is that most cases can't be proven either way. Of course you can't just assume the bloke is guilty in those situations. But equally you can't assume the woman is guilty of making it up.

 

[Saoirse]

Reporting something you experienced is fine, I have no problem with that ofcourse, its the going to the media that I have a problem with especially as nothing has been proven yet. I also appreciate that just because someone hasnt been found guilty doesnt necessarily mean they are innocent - but that is our justice system. Surely someone needs to go through that route before being reported by the media - just feels like this is trial by the public and media rather than the justice system.

What stops someone tomorrow going to the media about Kane, or anyone else for that matter? It is very dangerous ground. And lets be honest, I highly doubt the media are going to validate the story before reporting it - it sells papers etc

On another note - I also abhor that someone falsely accuses someone with a blatantly lies yet her identity is hidden with the accused who has had his life shattered is plastered all over the papers. There have been a few recent cases where this has happened - wasnt one of those cases to do with the police not submitting texts as evidence that basically evidences the 'victim' as having lied?

It's a hard one because I can see both sides of it. Yes, in the cases where men are falsely accused it's unfair on them. But equally, there've been a lot of cases - Brett Kavanaugh very recently, and the likes of Kevin Spacey and Harvey Weinstein before him - where the first person coming forward and it garnering media attention has led to a lot of other people joining them and saying it's happened to them too. That's really important for getting convictions because very often a rape is difficult or impossible to prove - but if you've got a serial rapist with a lot of cases against him it's more likely that at least some of them are legally watertight. I think we've got the balance roughly right in this country at the moment: the media can't just report what they like, if they put unsubstantiated allegations out there they can be subject to a legal challenge. The problem in these cases is that we can't control what the foreign media report - note that Der Spiegal were the only ones who'd covered this at first and we have zero control over what they print. Once that happens it obviously spreads online and there's no further harm done by the British media also reporting.

Given that it's normally so hard to prove what's happened either way, especially after a long period of time, I think the emphasis needs to be more on ensuring that victims are able and motivated to come forward as quickly as possible after the incident - if that becomes the norm, historic complaints will be less believable and therefore problematic to the accused in the future. I think the high-profile incidents of late help with this, but more needs to be done as well. For instance, I'd make these kind of out-of-court settlements illegal for cases where the alleged conduct is a seriousl criminal rather than civil matter. They incentivise victims to try and end the situation and move on quickly rather than wait for the lengthy and often traumatising judicial process, make it impossible for other potential victims to be made aware and come forward, and now it seems they don't even necessarily close the matter. And on the note of the judicial process, I think we need to make it far, far less traumatic for victims to give evidence - I don't see, for instance, the need for them to be physically present in court and have to face their rapist rather than answering questions seperately and remotely via an audio or video link. Ultimately though I guess my point is that the best and indeed only way to lessen false accusations is to support victims far better and far earlier in the process, ensuring there is as much credible evidence as possible on the table in these cases to avoid it becoming a game of "he said, she said" which is awful both for victims and the falselly accused.

 

[JCRD]

It's a hard one because I can see both sides of it. Yes, in the cases where men are falsely accused it's unfair on them. But equally, there've been a lot of cases - Brett Kavanaugh very recently, and the likes of Kevin Spacey and Harvey Weinstein before him - where the first person coming forward and it garnering media attention has led to a lot of other people joining them and saying it's happened to them too. That's really important for getting convictions because very often a rape is difficult or impossible to prove - but if you've got a serial rapist with a lot of cases against him it's more likely that at least some of them are legally watertight. I think we've got the balance roughly right in this country at the moment: the media can't just report what they like, if they put unsubstantiated allegations out there they can be subject to a legal challenge. The problem in these cases is that we can't control what the foreign media report - note that Der Spiegal were the only ones who'd covered this at first and we have zero control over what they print. Once that happens it obviously spreads online and there's no further harm done by the British media also reporting.

Given that it's normally so hard to prove what's happened either way, especially after a long period of time, I think the emphasis needs to be more on ensuring that victims are able and motivated to come forward as quickly as possible after the incident - if that becomes the norm, historic complaints will be less believable and therefore problematic to the accused in the future. I think the high-profile incidents of late help with this, but more needs to be done as well. For instance, I'd make these kind of out-of-court settlements illegal for cases where the alleged conduct is a seriousl criminal rather than civil matter. They incentivise victims to try and end the situation and move on quickly rather than wait for the lengthy and often traumatising judicial process, make it impossible for other potential victims to be made aware and come forward, and now it seems they don't even necessarily close the matter. And on the note of the judicial process, I think we need to make it far, far less traumatic for victims to give evidence - I don't see, for instance, the need for them to be physically present in court and have to face their rapist rather than answering questions seperately and remotely via an audio or video link. Ultimately though I guess my point is that the best and indeed only way to lessen false accusations is to support victims far better and far earlier in the process, ensuring there is as much credible evidence as possible on the table in these cases to avoid it becoming a game of "he said, she said" which is awful both for victims and the falselly accused.

You know about this stuff way more than I do or seem to know anyways and respect that. I see things quite simply and this alleged victim, if she was a victim then why go to the media? I dont get it. If I was raped or rather if I knew someone who was raped the first thing id do is tell her to go to the Police and take it from there.

Youre totally right that victims should come forward and the process should make it simple for them to feel at ease in doing so BUT go to the police and lawyers etc - not to the media as this person has done which signals alarm bells and people would doubt her from the off (as I am sure people already have, by the same token people have already found Ronaldo guilty)

I dont know the full story regarding this situation but from what ive read it just feels a tad wishy washy given how long ago it was etc. Dont forget, how crap must this be for his kid also, luckily he may not be exposed to this stuff yet but a few years older and he would be devastated reading this stuff.

 

[Saoirse]

You know about this stuff way more than I do or seem to know anyways and respect that. I see things quite simply and this alleged victim, if she was a victim then why go to the media? I dont get it. If I was raped or rather if I knew someone who was raped the first thing id do is tell her to go to the Police and take it from there.

Youre totally right that victims should come forward and the process should make it simple for them to feel at ease in doing so BUT go to the police and lawyers etc - not to the media as this person has done which signals alarm bells and people would doubt her from the off (as I am sure people already have, by the same token people have already found Ronaldo guilty)

I dont know the full story regarding this situation but from what ive read it just feels a tad wishy washy given how long ago it was etc. Dont forget, how crap must this be for his kid also, luckily he may not be exposed to this stuff yet but a few years older and he would be devastated reading this stuff.

By their own admission it's the media in this case who tracked her down for the story - travelling to Vegas, being turned down, only to eventually speak to her some times later - rather than her running to the media. As for why she'd agree to talk, two main reasons. Firstly the possibility that another victim will come forward. But also because since she's mounting a legal challenge, it will at some point become a matter of public record in Nevada at which stage the media get their hands on the story anyway - no doubt with a version of events pushed to them by Ronaldo's representatives. So it's not a choice whether there's media attention or not, merely on what the timing is and whether her version of events is included or not.

(thread)

 

['O Zio]

I know I'm going to go off tangent but I hate stories like the one with Ronaldo - I mean has it even been proved? is he guilty? It is some woman's accusation (potentially looking for a payday - who knows). What stops anyone going to the papers to tarnish people without any grounds etc

There have been far too many stories recently with people being accused of something when they have been found innocent - in turn mud sticks unfortunately and can ruin people.

Anyways mini rant over

Not really sure I'm knowledgeable to comment on the specifics of this case, but generally speaking I think something needs to be done about the "trial by media" culture that exists. Someone brought up before the point that Ronaldo paying her off doesn't necessarily mean he's done it, because the damage to his career would already be done if the allegations had come out even if they turned out not to be true, and i think that's an important point.

Personally I think there should be a media blackout on revealing the names of either the accuser or the defendant in cases like this where even the slightest suggestion that something may or may not have happened has the potential to cause significant distress to the defendant and/or their family, career etc. etc. so you'd only be able to print the names of them if they were found guilty. They do it for some cases already and punish people if they post the names on twitter etc. so I think it should be the same for these sort of cases. I think you should have a right to anonymity unless you're actually found guilty of something, otherwise it's often the case that the damage is done even if you're found not guilty

 

[DJS]

Not really sure I'm knowledgeable to comment on the specifics of this case, but generally speaking I think something needs to be done about the "trial by media" culture that exists. Someone brought up before the point that Ronaldo paying her off doesn't necessarily mean he's done it, because the damage to his career would already be done if the allegations had come out even if they turned out not to be true, and i think that's an important point.

Personally I think there should be a media blackout on revealing the names of either the accuser or the defendant in cases like this where even the slightest suggestion that something may or may not have happened has the potential to cause significant distress to the defendant and/or their family, career etc. etc. so you'd only be able to print the names of them if they were found guilty. They do it for some cases already and punish people if they post the names on twitter etc. so I think it should be the same for these sort of cases. I think you should have a right to anonymity unless you're actually found guilty of something, otherwise it's often the case that the damage is done even if you're found not guilty

Yep this.

Shouldn’t be able to name people until found guilty, and anyone who reveals the info beforehand should be given harsh punishment.

IF Ronaldo is innocent than this will still stick on him unfairly.

 

[Veuve Clicquot]

Sigh, I find it very revealing as well as depressing, to hear that you are able to feel sorry for and empathise with a rich, famous, multi millionaire who could be a potential rapist and yet not one word of sympathy for the alleged rape victim. Let me tell you from personal experience that rape and/or sexual assault is a horrifically traumatic event and one which you carry with you for the rest of your life. I think a lot of men still don't get how pervasive this issue is, one in three women have been sexually assaulted or raped during their lifetime, often more than once. Yet society and it's rape culture have failed women and silenced their voices, which is why it is the most under reported crime in the world.
Firstly, you are scared to come forward because of guilt,shame, fear of retaliation and not being believed. Women often get attacked and smeared for coming forward, it's like being victimised all over again. Rape cases that do get to court also have a shockingly low conviction rate (approx 25% compared with approx 86% of other crimes).

Because of the above, rape and sexual assault victims have lost confidence with a system that repeatedly fails them. Imagine, therefore, how difficult it is for women to come forward with an accusation against powerful/rich/famous men like Ronaldo with their army of lawyers and PR teams?
Ronaldo's life and career will not be ruined unless this case ends up in court and he is convicted, in which case he will deserve it. Meanwhile, the Kindergarten teacher who has given up her job to deal with this,
will no doubt be getting death threats from his fanboys and his highly paid PR team will conduct a vicious smear campaign in an attempt to discredit her. I know who I feel more sympathy for and it isn't him.
In addition, I find this whole pushing back against #metoo with this ''false accusation ' narrative extremely disheartening. False allegations are harmful but incredibly rare for the reasons given above and ironically, men are a thousand times more likely to be a victim of child abuse perpetrated by another man than be falsely accused by a woman. So this victim blaming narrative is equally harmful to men. On the other hand, the only person guaranteed to lie about rape is the rapist themselves.
Also, the oft repeated 'innocent until proven guilty' mantra is only applicable in a court of law where the accused is in danger of imprisonment, getting a criminal record and going on the sex offenders register. None of which is applicable in this case.
However, outside of court, women and men have been driven to social or mainstream media with their allegations against powerful wealthy men because they are fed up of being silenced/let down by society and the justice system and are finally being given a platform for their voice to be heard. But far from having their 'lives ruined' pretty much the worse that has happened to these men, most with multiple credible accusations against them, is that they have been removed from their jobs or are lying low until they think this blows over, this while they still live their multi million $ lifestyles. Let's not forget a man with 20 sexual assault allegations is POTUS and a man with three allegations is likely to be confirmed as a US Supreme court Judge. Plus sex offender Louis CK is now back on the comedy circuit ( even though he is worth $35 million and never has to work again). So no, compared to the millions of rape and sexual assault victims (male and female) who carry their mental scars forever, these men's lives are not being ruined. In fact, if you read a lot of the stories, it's the accusers lives that are often ruined because they lose their job/are blacklisted.
The only time powerful men have/will face any sort of justice is when there have been multiple allegations of rape - Bill Cosby (60 victims) and Weinstein (80+ victims). So the likelihood of Ronaldo facing justice is minimal, because one woman's word never seems to be enough. This is another reason why accused parties should always be named because it encourages other potential victims to come forward and therefore more likely to result in a conviction.
Ultimately, any narrative that only talks about supposed 'false allegations' and how they are 'ruining men's lives' only helps to enable a victim blaming rape culture and prevents victims from speaking out. A man's career is not worth more than a victims trauma.

 

[Saoirse]

@Dougal Think it might be worth splitting this thread or changing the title? This looks like a story which is going to run for quite some time given the case has been re-opened and it obviously has nothing to do with his tax fraud.