[News] New court document reveals details in Mike Ribeiro sexual assault case

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Weitz

We shall never know if these allegations were true I suppose.

That's true, we'll never know.

It could be a case of wild and false accusations, and Ribeiro's lawyer tells him it's just easier to settle out of court.

Or, Ribeiro seriously is a dirtbag (and pedophile to boot) and his lawyer says it'll be less damaging to your reputation and job to just settle out of court.

[Enoch Root]

While it's true that we'll never know, I know that if someone accused me of "graphic sexual assault claims... some of which allegedly occurred (as) a teenager", I would fight to the bitter end to prove my complete innocence. No matter the cost.

(unless of course I had some things to hide)

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

While it's true that we'll never know, I know that if someone accused me of "graphic sexual assault claims... some of which allegedly occurred (as) a teenager", I would fight to the bitter end to prove my complete innocence. No matter the cost.

(unless of course I had some things to hide)

No, you wouldn't.

Easier to settle and let it pass then fight it in open court.

[dash_pinched]

Originally Posted by Weitz

No, you wouldn't.

Um, how do you know this to be the case?

[Weitz]

Because it's easy to say so now. But if you are a professional hockey player with high paid lawyers and advisors you would be settling.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Weitz

No, you wouldn't.

Easier to settle and let it pass then fight it in open court.

lol

okay then

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

While it's true that we'll never know, I know that if someone accused me of "graphic sexual assault claims... some of which allegedly occurred (as) a teenager", I would fight to the bitter end to prove my complete innocence. No matter the cost.

(unless of course I had some things to hide)

I don't know, arguably this suit cost Ribeiro millions of dollars in salary plus whatever the settlement cost him.

Don't think it is a coincidence that details of this case started coming out two weeks before the start of free agency. Pretty good lawyering on the girls' side.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

I don't know, arguably this suit cost Ribeiro millions of dollars in salary plus whatever the settlement cost him.

Don't think it is a coincidence that details of this case started coming out two weeks before the start of free agency. Pretty good lawyering on the girls' side.

I would imagine that his past track record, with Phoenix in particular, would have more to do with his contract negotiations.

Regardless, if it's me (and I'm innocent), I would be more concerned with clearing my name.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Because it's easy to say so now. But if you are a professional hockey player with high paid lawyers and advisors you would be settling.

And as a professional hockey player with high paid lawyers you know this to be truth?

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

While it's true that we'll never know, I know that if someone accused me of "graphic sexual assault claims... some of which occurred (as) a teenager", I would fight to the bitter end to prove my complete innocence. No matter the cost.

(unless of course I had some things to hide)

While it's true that we'll never know, I know that if someone had committed "graphic sexual assault against me... some of which allegedly occurred (as) a teenager", I would fight to the bitter end to prove Ribero's complete guilt no matter the cost.

(unless of course I had some thing to hide like just wanting to cash in on a bs claim )

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

I don't know, arguably this suit cost Ribeiro millions of dollars in salary plus whatever the settlement cost him.

Don't think it is a coincidence that details of this case started coming out two weeks before the start of free agency. Pretty good lawyering on the girls' side.

Absolutely, on both parts.
He would have been very foolish to not settle this given that opportunity, imo.
And it was well played by her legal council.
Money trumps truth, apparently for both parties here.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Psytic

While it's true that we'll never know, I know that if someone had committed "graphic sexual assault against me... some of which allegedly occurred (as) a teenager", I would fight to the bitter end to prove Ribero's complete guilt no matter the cost.

(unless of course I had some thing to hide like just wanting to cash in on a bs claim )

Your point is valid, but two things:

1) it doesn't negate my point at all

2) it is different in the sense that the victim isn't fighting for their own innocence. Compensation is a primary purpose of the suit and getting a settlement without having to fight is a legitimate choice, even if they were totally in the right.

[EldrickOnIce]

He is not fighting for his innocence either. There were no charges laid.
He is fighting for minimal impact on his potential to earn huge NHL dollars, and settling mitigates further damage.

I think it's pretty obvious Ribeiro is guilty of being scummy, but settling is simply good business, regardless of what the truth is in this case.

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Your point is valid, but two things:

1) it doesn't negate my point at all

2) it is different in the sense that the victim isn't fighting for their own innocence. Compensation is a primary purpose of the suit and getting a settlement without having to fight is a legitimate choice, even if they were totally in the right.

Hundreds of defendants with pretty strong cases settle every day. A settlement gives you at least some control of the outcome. A trial is a coin flip.

Ribeiro settling gives you precisely zero insight as to what actually happened. Zero.

[H2SO4(aq)]

nvm

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

Hundreds of defendants with pretty strong cases settle every day. A settlement gives you at least some control of the outcome. A trial is a coin flip.

Ribeiro settling gives you precisely zero insight as to what actually happened. Zero.

This.

[FlamesAddiction]

Personally, I think it's bull that someone can accuse someone of a crime and then settle for money instead of prosecuting. If he is a rapist, how does this protect society?

If someone violated me the way described in the complaint, I think I would rather push ahead with charges and then file a civil suit after the results (which aren't even necessarily contingent on a guilty verdict).

I suppose the victim and her lawyer have insight that I don't, so I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Personally, I think it's bull that someone can accuse someone of a crime and then settle for money instead of prosecuting. If he is a rapist, how does this protect society?

If someone violated me the way described in the complaint, I think I would rather push ahead with charges and then file a civil suit after the results (which aren't even necessarily contingent on a guilty verdict).

I suppose the victim and her lawyer have insight that I don't, so I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

Why give them the benefit of the doubt?

For all we know it was all made up and she got very little if anything out of Ribeiro.

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Personally, I think it's bull that someone can accuse someone of a crime and then settle for money instead of prosecuting. If he is a rapist, how does this protect society?

If someone violated me the way described in the complaint, I think I would rather push ahead with charges and then file a civil suit after the results (which aren't even necessarily contingent on a guilty verdict).

I suppose the victim and her lawyer have insight that I don't, so I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

This is a civil suit. I don't know if the nanny pressed criminal charges, but, at least in Canada (and this is in the US), once criminal charges have been laid the victim has no control over the proceedings whatsoever.

It's common practice in these situations to press criminal charges and let the trial play out. A conviction or guilty plea can then serve as evidence in a civil trial on the same facts, thus saving a good deal of time and expense (since you don't have to pay the Crown to prosecute).

Money is exactly what the nanny was seeking in filing a civil suit. She can't get a criminal conviction from a civil suit.

It's much more difficult to prove the elements of the crime of sexual assault than it is the elements of the civil equivalent of the same. It has to do with the burden of proof (hence why a criminal conviction is good evidence of the civil equivalent). In many sexual assault cases the evidence is sketchy and it is a credibility trial. As I noted above, trial is a coin flip, win/lose scenario, and it's often in the best interests of both parties to settle.

The whole "I demand a trial to prove my innocence!" or "I demand a trial to prove my assailant's guilt!" is much more TV drama than real life.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Why give them the benefit of the doubt?

For all we know it was all made up and she got very little if anything out of Ribeiro.

Yes, "settle" can mean:

A) You have no case, but here is $7,500 nuisance money to go away
B) I am a diddler, so here is $500,000 to hush it up
C) Anything between those