Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 46 to 56 of 56
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    4,165
    Quote Originally Posted by FlowdaBroncoFan View Post
    I haven't paid to much attention to this, so him lying is new to me. All I knew was what was reported at the Draft, and that was both his attorney and the Raiders felt confident this was going to go away.
    Suggest you read the two comments above your last post. Also a link with updates.

    Also seems to be a discrepancy from some on the validity of the statements. Somehow now splitting hairs on the meanings of sexual "act" and sexual "event". Lawyers doing what lawyers do . Fun times!

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,666
    Quote Originally Posted by FR Tim View Post
    Suggest you read the two comments above your last post. Also a link with updates.

    Also seems to be a discrepancy from some on the validity of the statements. Somehow now splitting hairs on the meanings of sexual "act" and sexual "event". Lawyers doing what lawyers do . Fun times!
    I just read that. I will hold my opinions until the situation is resolved.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Kalifornia
    Posts
    6,383
    Quote Originally Posted by FR Tim View Post
    Suggest you read the two comments above your last post. Also a link with updates.

    Also seems to be a discrepancy from some on the validity of the statements. Somehow now splitting hairs on the meanings of sexual "act" and sexual "event". Lawyers doing what lawyers do . Fun times!
    This is exactly my point, I don't think it's wise to jump to conclusions when the wordsmiths get involved. If he lied, then he lied which would open himself to some serious questions. However, the article presented doesn't really provide any new information about it. Had it said DNA evidence proves ******l sex took place, that would be entirely different. The wording from the twitter feed, which the article is based on, is quite vague. It's not out of the realm of possibility that it was written entirely as click bait, given its contents, I think it's somewhat likely.
    Anonymity is cowardice, and cowards are not known for their wisdom.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    4,311
    Quote Originally Posted by JJBroncoFan View Post
    If you follow those links it brings you to a twitter feed, and the words used are that a "consensual sexual event" occurred. I quoted myself above to show that he indeed already said a consenual sexual event occured, she performed oral sex on him. There is really nothing new here it seems, just a play on words to inspire clicks. This is how I view in at least until someone credible openly says another form of sex took place beyond doubt. Do not mistake this for me sticking up for the accused, I still believe rapists should be castrated or killed. However, I also firmly believe in innocence until proven guilty.
    Actually the article, if I am reading the Profootball focus article correctly, is calling into question the credibility of the witnesses. Conley unless I have forgotten something in his initial statement never stated that he never had any sexual relations with the woman. He did say he didn't do anything wrong. and again when I read the other articles where they do into details about interviewing the witnesses they are all similar. So it is sounding like Conley, at no point in the night, was alone with the woman. again my comment can change if details emerge to the contrary.

    I have also gone back and looked at this link: http://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2017/st...es-allegations

    Interestingly enough the details in this link state that he was never ALONE with the woman and that HE did nothing wrong....so does that mean that there is the potential that the oral Sex occurred in plain sight? or in the washroom? - appears like it could have been possible.

    Now there is this link here which goes into quite some detail but as with everything NONE of this has been vetted and verified:

    http://www.nfldraftdiamonds.com/draf...be-the-victim/

    Also consensual sex does not always mean what many think it means. There are several other forms of consensual sex which could well have taken place. In fact see below an article from Yahoo Sports:

    https://sports.yahoo.com/news/lawyer...223954315.html

    The exact words used in the headline are "Consensual Sexual Event" and that in broad terms supports the witness and Conley's statements that he received oral sex from the accuser. There is another tweet from Ian Rappaport which I quote below:

    Text from Gareon Conley's lawyer: "When I referenced a 'consensual sexual event,' I was NOT referring to intercourse. That did NOT happen."
    So despite more and more information being slowly released aside form those posting articles to try and nab extra clicks the vast majority of the information all seems to jive.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Kalifornia
    Posts
    6,383
    Rich C, this article is from Rod's post on page 2.

    http://www.nfldraftdiamonds.com/draf...be-the-victim/

    This is the article in which the witnesses say oral sex was the only sexual act that occurred. This is why I had previously said that DNA evidence would tell the truth about other forms of sex, possibly. Conley had agreed with the witness statements, so by association agreed that consenual oral sex had occured, but nothing else. This new article is vague and based off a twitter feed that is even more vague.
    Anonymity is cowardice, and cowards are not known for their wisdom.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    4,311
    Quote Originally Posted by JJBroncoFan View Post
    Rich C, this article is from Rod's post on page 2.

    http://www.nfldraftdiamonds.com/draf...be-the-victim/

    This is the article in which the witnesses say oral sex was the only sexual act that occurred. This is why I had previously said that DNA evidence would tell the truth about other forms of sex, possibly. Conley had agreed with the witness statements, so by association agreed that consenual oral sex had occured, but nothing else. This new article is vague and based off a twitter feed that is even more vague.
    You are correct...although I don't see the new article as being all that vague. What is of real interest here is that 3-4 witnesses & Conley would all have had to line up their stories 100% with little to no variance & the rape kit would need to come back with conclusive evidence for this to end up with Conley to be charged - IMO. While this case had had many varying reports generally speaking the general constants in most of them have been that Oral sex occurred in the bathroom where the other couple were having sex (who knows of what variety). Shortly after the sexual act was over the alleged victim was asked to leave the hotel room. Since this did occur in a hotel I'd assume that the witness accounts can at the very least be confirmed (ie. That the two women in the room left/ entered the elevator together). All-the-while keeping in mind that the statement provided by the alleged victim has already had a hole shot through it as she did not first meet Conley on the elevator. I too believe innocent until proven guilty and I hope all of the right information comes out. If Conley is found guilty based on evidence I hope he goes to jail but on the other hand if this woman is in-fact just doing this out of spite I hope she sees jail-time as well.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Kalifornia
    Posts
    6,383
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich_C View Post
    You are correct...although I don't see the new article as being all that vague. What is of real interest here is that 3-4 witnesses & Conley would all have had to line up their stories 100% with little to no variance & the rape kit would need to come back with conclusive evidence for this to end up with Conley to be charged - IMO. While this case had had many varying reports generally speaking the general constants in most of them have been that Oral sex occurred in the bathroom where the other couple were having sex (who knows of what variety). Shortly after the sexual act was over the alleged victim was asked to leave the hotel room. Since this did occur in a hotel I'd assume that the witness accounts can at the very least be confirmed (ie. That the two women in the room left/ entered the elevator together). All-the-while keeping in mind that the statement provided by the alleged victim has already had a hole shot through it as she did not first meet Conley on the elevator. I too believe innocent until proven guilty and I hope all of the right information comes out. If Conley is found guilty based on evidence I hope he goes to jail but on the other hand if this woman is in-fact just doing this out of spite I hope she sees jail-time as well.
    Completely agree! Couldn't have said it better myself, thanks for sharing all of that as well.
    Anonymity is cowardice, and cowards are not known for their wisdom.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    8,228
    Quote Originally Posted by JJBroncoFan View Post
    If you follow those links it brings you to a twitter feed, and the words used are that a "consensual sexual event" occurred. I quoted myself above to show that he indeed already said a consenual sexual event occured, she performed oral sex on him. There is really nothing new here it seems, just a play on words to inspire clicks. This is how I view in at least until someone credible openly says another form of sex took place beyond doubt. Do not mistake this for me sticking up for the accused, I still believe rapists should be castrated or killed. However, I also firmly believe in innocence until proven guilty.
    The witnesses in the room said that Conley didn't hook up with her, and that she was just mad she got kicked out of the room. So you have witnesses, who several people on here instantly believed, and now their entire statements are thrown out, because of the key fact being completely wrong, as now admitted by Conley's lawyer. Also of note, there were 3 witnesses in the room, 2 of his buddies and a woman, the 2 buddies are the ones who gave statements, the female did not.

    http://www.totalprosports.com/2017/0...-rape-accuser/

    I hope justice prevails for whichever side was wronged in this case, just seems like a lot of people immediately started calling her a gold digger and wanted her to be charged based on witness accounts which have now been proven to be either incorrect or flat out lies.
    "I never lose, I either win or I learn."

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    8,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich_C View Post
    You are correct...although I don't see the new article as being all that vague. What is of real interest here is that 3-4 witnesses & Conley would all have had to line up their stories 100% with little to no variance & the rape kit would need to come back with conclusive evidence for this to end up with Conley to be charged - IMO. While this case had had many varying reports generally speaking the general constants in most of them have been that Oral sex occurred in the bathroom where the other couple were having sex (who knows of what variety). Shortly after the sexual act was over the alleged victim was asked to leave the hotel room. Since this did occur in a hotel I'd assume that the witness accounts can at the very least be confirmed (ie. That the two women in the room left/ entered the elevator together). All-the-while keeping in mind that the statement provided by the alleged victim has already had a hole shot through it as she did not first meet Conley on the elevator. I too believe innocent until proven guilty and I hope all of the right information comes out. If Conley is found guilty based on evidence I hope he goes to jail but on the other hand if this woman is in-fact just doing this out of spite I hope she sees jail-time as well.
    Only 2 witnesses (his two friends) made statements, the third witness, a female, did not. Also the witnesses initially said that nothing happened between the two.

    Edit to add link:

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...here-are-none/

    EDIT 2: Also note that Conley left the scene by the time police showed up. So now you just his two buddies to quickly agree to say nothing happened, and they can later call Conley and tell him exactly what they said. It's not a grand conspiracy, pretty easy to get those ducks in a row. The key is the female witness who didn't provide a statement, she's the key witness in this.
    Last edited by Butler By'Note; 05-03-2017 at 02:04 PM.
    "I never lose, I either win or I learn."

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    13,215
    Quote Originally Posted by Butler By'Note View Post
    The witnesses in the room said that Conley didn't hook up with her, and that she was just mad she got kicked out of the room. So you have witnesses, who several people on here instantly believed, and now their entire statements are thrown out, because of the key fact being completely wrong, as now admitted by Conley's lawyer. Also of note, there were 3 witnesses in the room, 2 of his buddies and a woman, the 2 buddies are the ones who gave statements, the female did not.

    http://www.totalprosports.com/2017/0...-rape-accuser/

    I hope justice prevails for whichever side was wronged in this case, just seems like a lot of people immediately started calling her a gold digger and wanted her to be charged based on witness accounts which have now been proven to be either incorrect or flat out lies.
    I think it might have been more a combination of witnesses abs the fact she lied about meeting him on the elevator when video proof came out that she led about that.

    Now you have both sides lying so now who knows who to believe and hopefully they get to the bottom of this and serve justice correctly.

    Adopted posters: Every last poster on the amazing broncos country message board. All of them past and present and future

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Kalifornia
    Posts
    6,383
    Quote Originally Posted by Butler By'Note View Post
    Only 2 witnesses (his two friends) made statements, the third witness, a female, did not. Also the witnesses initially said that nothing happened between the two.

    Edit to add link:

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...here-are-none/

    EDIT 2: Also note that Conley left the scene by the time police showed up. So now you just his two buddies to quickly agree to say nothing happened, and they can later call Conley and tell him exactly what they said. It's not a grand conspiracy, pretty easy to get those ducks in a row. The key is the female witness who didn't provide a statement, she's the key witness in this.
    I don't know if you read the link I provided. In it, the other female made a statement, to an investigative reporter agreeing with the statements of the men.

    Also, according to that report, the accuser asked her to go along with the lie. Obviously, I don't know what really happened, I'm going off the situation and the statements. The article I posted is not contradictory to the police statements, but supplemental.
    Last edited by JJBroncoFan; 05-03-2017 at 02:48 PM.
    Anonymity is cowardice, and cowards are not known for their wisdom.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •