• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Soccer star Cristiano Ronaldo credibly accused of rape

Checkmite

Skepticifimisticalationist
Checkmite
Joined
Jun 7, 2002
Messages
29,007
Location
Gulf Coast
The story that Ronaldo had allegedly raped a woman in Las Vegas was originally reported on last year but received little traction, with some sources noting the purported victim's refusal to talk to the press about the matter and Ronaldo's agency's dismissal of the entire claim as fictional.

However, things have now changed. The alleged victim's new attorney has revealed the existence of a non-disclosure agreement and settlement between the victim, Kathryn Mayorga, and Ronaldo which had kept the victim from speaking earlier about the matter, but which the attorney asserts is non-enforceable. Several settlement-related documents signed by both Ronaldo and Mayorga have been given to the press, including (according to Der Spiegel) an interview of Ronaldo conducted by his own attorney in which Ronaldo confirms the pertinent details of the incident, plainly stating that the victim said she didn't want to have sex and repeatedly told him "no" and to stop during the act, but he did it anyway because she "continued to make herself available" and "didn't scream".

The Der Spiegel story can be read here.
 
I just read that article. That certainly was a disturbing account she gave about what happened. Also, the article says that Ronaldo admitted that she said 'no" many times and that he apologized to her afterwards. I wonder what will happen with all this.
 
Checkmite said:
The alleged victim's new attorney has revealed the existence of a non-disclosure agreement and settlement between the victim, Kathryn Mayorga, and Ronaldo
Click to expand...


So some rich guy thinks that he can buy an NDA and get away with rape.
I'm not surprised.
 
Well, he's got the "Fake, fake news," thing down . That was his claim in an Instagram video today. Maybe he's laying the groundwork for a post-football career in politics. Make Portugal Great Again!
 
Last edited:
A shocking lack of coverage considering the seriousness of the allegations and the prominence of Ronaldo.
 
It obviously didn't happen. That's why he paid her money to not disclose it.

Sounds like a douchebag to me.
 
From here it looks like just Yet Another Gold Mining. nothing more... (aka money is exhausted, time to extract more)

Cynical? Yes. But wouldn't be surprising given it is from country of false accusations called USA.
 
Klimax said:
From here it looks like just Yet Another Gold Mining. nothing more... (aka money is exhausted, time to extract more)

Cynical? Yes. But wouldn't be surprising given it is from country of false accusations called USA.
Click to expand...

False accusation?

Did you miss the opening post?

Checkmite said:
.....Several settlement-related documents signed by both Ronaldo and Mayorga have been given to the press, including (according to Der Spiegel) an interview of Ronaldo conducted by his own attorney in which Ronaldo confirms the pertinent details of the incident, plainly stating that the victim said she didn't want to have sex and repeatedly told him "no" and to stop during the act, but he did it anyway because she "continued to make herself available" and "didn't scream".
Click to expand...
 
fagin said:
False accusation?

Did you miss the opening post?
Click to expand...

I saw the opening post.

It looks like he raped her, then he paid her to not say anything, then she said something, now he will have to pay her more? or will the LVPD charge him with a crime?

How does an out of court settlement affect the Police Department's ability to file a charge?

Does anyone know about how this would affect a criminal investigation?
 
But he’s not white, he is an oppressed brown guy. How can we hate him if he isn’t white?
 
Cristiano Ronaldo: "I admit I raped a woman."

International Skeptics: "Hey look, a thread about gold diggers and race!"
 
Tony said:
But he’s not white, he is an oppressed brown guy. How can we hate him if he isn’t white?
Click to expand...

Portuguese were one of the first oppressors.

Of course he's white if we are going to use these tentative racial categories.
 
When you are a celebrity, you can get away with it, right? No means yes.

I don't know what else there is to say. He admits that she said no and told him to stop. He did it anyway.

But he is a major football star, so that has to be taken into account. Wouldn't want to ruin his life or his football team's chances of winning over it.
 
Must be cultural differences here..."making herself available" "didn't scream"

His own lawyer conducted an interview where he admits raping the woman?

Doesn't sound like a very good lawyer.

How accurate is Der Spiegel's report of what Ronaldo said?
 
Drewbot said:
I saw the opening post.

It looks like he raped her, then he paid her to not say anything, then she said something, now he will have to pay her more? or will the LVPD charge him with a crime?

How does an out of court settlement affect the Police Department's ability to file a charge?

Does anyone know about how this would affect a criminal investigation?
Click to expand...

To add:

How can an out of court settlement to cover up an illegal act be enforceable?
 
I've said this all along.

It should be illegal to accept payment to keep quiet about a felony.

Such as when Rose McGowan apparently takes $100K to keep quiet about a felony sexual assault by Harvey Weinstein.

This leads to criminals being able to continue their crimes, and it leads to extortion.

Of course Weinstein apparently had such payoffs in his contract, and our own Congress apparently had such an arrangement as well.
 
I would like to see that made into law.

It should be illegal to offer or accept payment or compensation to cover up a felony criminal act.

You can choose not to press charges, but not for compensation.

You can still sue in civil court for damages.

But you can't accept or offer compensation for the purposes of hiding the felony criminal act.
 
LTC8K6 said:
I would like to see that made into law.

It should be illegal to offer or accept payment or compensation to cover up a felony criminal act.

You can choose not to press charges, but not for compensation.

You can still sue in civil court for damages.

But you can't accept or offer compensation for the purposes of hiding the felony criminal act.
Click to expand...

I would not penalize the one who accepts it. Only the one who offers.

In that case, the victim is not bound by squat and can keep the money.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Must be cultural differences here..."making herself available" "didn't scream"

His own lawyer conducted an interview where he admits raping the woman?

Doesn't sound like a very good lawyer.
Click to expand...

There have been threads on this very forum where some individuals have argued that repeatedly saying "no" and "stop" are not necessarily good enough to establish denial of consent because there is "nuance" and "tone" to consider. Sounds like Ronaldo and his lawyer would likely agree with them.
 
He was arrested in 2005 after being accused of rape in London, but charges were dropped due to insufficient evidence.
 
LTC8K6 said:
I would like to see that made into law.

It should be illegal to offer or accept payment or compensation to cover up a felony criminal act.

You can choose not to press charges, but not for compensation.

You can still sue in civil court for damages.

But you can't accept or offer compensation for the purposes of hiding the felony criminal act.
Click to expand...

pgwenthold said:
I would not penalize the one who accepts it. Only the one who offers.

In that case, the victim is not bound by squat and can keep the money.
Click to expand...

Because of the difficulties - I tend to LTC8K6's view.

Sometimes to protect people, sub-optimal solutions need to be prevented.

See the Bill Cosby thread for something similar.

"Accept this NDA and a fat cheque or I'll make sure you never work in this industry again and do my utmost to ruin you and your friends financially."
 
jimbob said:
Because of the difficulties - I tend to LTC8K6's view.

Sometimes to protect people, sub-optimal solutions need to be prevented.

See the Bill Cosby thread for something similar.

"Accept this NDA and a fat cheque or I'll make sure you never work in this industry again and do my utmost to ruin you and your friends financially."
Click to expand...

But criminal charges against the victim of rape for accepting money from someone who was wrong to offer it to them in the first place?

I'm not getting it, I think.
 
pgwenthold said:
But criminal charges against the victim of rape for accepting money from someone who was wrong to offer it to them in the first place?

I'm not getting it, I think.
Click to expand...

I too agree; it seems to want to penalize victims further for being intimidated or succumbing to pressure by their assailant to accept a settlement and keep quiet.

California has an interesting way of handling this sort of situation. In that state, out-of-court settlements over an incident of sexual abuse are acceptable in any amount, however non-disclosure clauses are illegal and unenforceable in cases of sexual misconduct. So a victim who feels properly compensated by a settlement offer can keep quiet at their own option, but it is definitely their own option and the perpetrator has no power to punish them should they later on decide to talk to the press, or the authorities, or even just privately to their families.
 
dann said:
So some rich guy thinks that he can buy an NDA and get away with rape.
Click to expand...

I've mentioned this is other context but how NDA's are used/perceived in certain legal discussions has always baffled me.

The law in most countries seems to come down pretty solidly on the "NDA's can't be used to hide illegal activities" side of the coin, but so often in legal discussions they are spoken of like the Bogeyman, all powerful magical incantations that hide the truth of everything from Bigfoot and Aliens to the Amanda Knox case.
 
pgwenthold said:
But criminal charges against the victim of rape for accepting money from someone who was wrong to offer it to them in the first place?

I'm not getting it, I think.
Click to expand...

It can breed extortion. The victim could continue to demand more and more from the perp to keep quiet. This situation can lead down a very bad road.

It would certainly be on a case by case basis.

Overall, it just seems like a bad idea to allow felons to keep out of jail by paying off their victims.
 
LTC8K6 said:
It can breed extortion. The victim could continue to demand more and more from the perp to keep quiet. This situation can lead down a very bad road.

It would certainly be on a case by case basis.

Overall, it just seems like a bad idea to allow felons to keep out of jail by paying off their victims.
Click to expand...

So the perp has to decide between paying off the victim or confessing to the crime?

Gee, what is a rapist to do? Such tough choices they face....
 
pgwenthold said:
So the perp has to decide between paying off the victim or confessing to the crime?

Gee, what is a rapist to do? Such tough choices they face....
Click to expand...

No, the victim decides.

Press charges or don't press charges.

Sue in civil court for damages, or don't.

The perp has no say other than to confess.

Offering a payoff to the victim would just add to the charges.

But yes, it needs to be thought through more carefully than just a remark on a message board.
 
Last edited:
According to CNN, the Las Vegas police re-opened the case on Monday. I dont think this is going to go away as quickly as the Ronaldo camp is hoping.
 
Checkmite said:
I too agree; it seems to want to penalize victims further for being intimidated or succumbing to pressure by their assailant to accept a settlement and keep quiet.

California has an interesting way of handling this sort of situation. In that state, out-of-court settlements over an incident of sexual abuse are acceptable in any amount, however non-disclosure clauses are illegal and unenforceable in cases of sexual misconduct. So a victim who feels properly compensated by a settlement offer can keep quiet at their own option, but it is definitely their own option and the perpetrator has no power to punish them should they later on decide to talk to the press, or the authorities, or even just privately to their families.
Click to expand...

Does the signing of such an "out-of-court settlement" preclude criminal prosecution? Likewise are they required by law to repay the hush money if they decide to speak out after they agree to such an agreement?

In any case such practices are definitively problematic because there are more reasons for criminalizing acts than to force someone to reimburse their victims for the damage and suffering they have caused, if there are any victims at all.
 
Part of me (part not all of me) wants to argue that if we don't have some legal framework for allowing some sort of "settle for money" agreement, people are just going to do it under the table and that magnifies the, the be fair very real, problems with it.
 
Arcade22 said:
Does the signing of such an "out-of-court settlement" preclude criminal prosecution? Likewise are they required by law to repay the hush money if they decide to speak out after they agree to such an agreement?
Click to expand...

No. In no case can a civil settlement ever prevent authorities from filing charges if they receive a complaint. But in some cases where victims accepted settlements that included non-disclosure clauses and then later decided to go to the police anyway - or answered truthfully when police came to them for whatever reason - perpetrators in the past have tried to punish them after the fact by suing them for breach of contract (arguing that talking to the police violates the non-disclosure clause). I don't know how successful such lawsuits have been historically - but California has eliminated the problem altogether by making non-disclosure clauses illegal in sex-abuse settlements.
 
Drewbot said:
THIS case is what I would call credibly accused.
Click to expand...


(In the role of Devil's Advocate)

How can you judge her account to be credible at this time? There is only a "he said - she said" situation right now with no actual evidence of a rape.

The fact that she went to police and asked for a rape test and did not identify the accused assailant at that time speaks volumes for me.
That is called setting the stage.
She obviously only wanted there to be a record of sex because a rape kit/examination in an adult woman only confirms sexual intercourse and DNA - not whether unwanted force or coercion was used.
She obviously wanted to have this evidence of sexual relations in her bag of tricks when started her shakedown of the man.

So far we only have a newspaper stating that her lawsuit - not evidence in court - states that the man admitted he had sex over her protestations. In fact the newspaper treats it as only an allegation because - surprise surprise - it is only an allegation in a lawsuit at this time.
Here is what the newspaper states:
After the attack, according to the lawsuit, Ronaldo apologized, "stating he was sorry, he was usually a gentleman.The lawsuit alleges that Ronaldo told his representatives that "she said 'no' and 'stop' several times.

Repeat after me: Allegations

The world is full of people making false allegations against famous/wealthy people or companies and getting a payday because the time/effort/distress/bad publicity that such allegations incur are far more than the paltry sums paid to make the false allegations go away. Many people and companies have contingency plans in place to deal with such ridiculous claims.

Allegations without test are just that - Allegations. There is no proof or corroborating evidence of any foul play by the man.

Obviously the detective and the nurse saw right through the woman's then months old claims when she finally named the man in a calculated way to put pressure on the negotiating team. That is why they tried to stop her from going ahead.

This woman wanted a payday against the man and did everything she could in a completely predictable and devious way to achieve that goal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom