Skip to content

Lawyer for one of Ben's bodyguards makes predictable claim

While sifting through the suddenly-constant updates in the Ben Roethlisberger sexual assault case, I came across an item from Gary Mihoces of USA Today titled “Analyst:  ‘Just no way to prosecute’ Ben Roethlisberger case.”

My first thought was to see who the analyst is, and to understand why he or she believes that there’s “no way to prosecute” Roethlisberger.  As it turns out, the “analyst” represents one of the two off-duty police officers who moonlight as Ben’s bodyguards.

“That tells me what I’ve thought all along,” Michael Santicola said regarding the news that police had withdrawn a request for DNA evidence.  “There’s just no way to prosecute this case.  There’s no crime.”

Santicola, who represents Anthony Barravecchio, is hardly an “analyst.”  Santicola is an “advocate,” because his client eventually could be charged as an “accessory.”

Consider the most recent report from ESPN’s Kelly Naqi, who writes that one of the two Big Ben bodyguards was blocking the path that led to the bathroom in which the alleged incident occurred.

Another attorney with whom Mihoces spoke, who has no apparent connection to the case, offered a different view.  “DNA only becomes important if the person that’s been accused said, ‘Look
I was nowhere near the girl, we never had any physical contact and
she’s making all this up,'” said Atlanta lawyer Page Pate.

That’s the point we’ve been making.  There’s no need for DNA evidence if, as has been reported, Roethsliberger admitted to engaging in sexual contact with the alleged victim.

More importantly, there’s no reason to regard as persuasive or unbiased the opinion of a lawyer who has a client with an obvious interest in seeing this thing go away.

Permalink 97 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Pittsburgh Steelers, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
97 Responses to “Lawyer for one of Ben's bodyguards makes predictable claim”
  1. karmathaitch says: Mar 25, 2010 7:49 PM

    Didnt the cops Kill Biggie Smalls??

  2. Noah D says: Mar 25, 2010 7:50 PM

    This has nothing to do with McNabb or the Raiders! I need info, Florio! I need the trade details! I need them!

  3. Kaz says: Mar 25, 2010 7:52 PM

    Check returned insufficient funds. Big “Get em drunk” Ben better add another 0 or 2…

  4. yazman of steel says: Mar 25, 2010 7:54 PM

    More importantly, there’s no reason to regard as persuasive or unbiased the opinion of a so called sports writer who has a complete and total hatred of Roethlisberger with an obvious interest in seeing this thing drag on forever.
    “Roethsliberger” at least spel he name wright.

  5. Bwa Ha Ha says: Mar 25, 2010 7:54 PM

    Buyin his way into the clear
    It won’t last, ’cause Ben won’t last. Too young, too dumb, too fulla c*m

  6. RebaT.. says: Mar 25, 2010 7:54 PM

    “Another attorney with whom Mihoces spoke, who has no apparent connection to the case, offered a different view. “DNA only becomes important if the person that’s been accused said, ‘Look I was no where near the girl, we never had any physical contact and she’s making all this up,'” said Atlanta lawyer Page Pate.”
    “That’s the point we’ve been making. There’s no need for DNA evidence if, as has been reported, Roethsliberger admitted to engaging in sexual contact with the alleged victim.”
    ________________________________
    HHHHELLLOOOOOO!!!! He cooked his own goose. Ding, ding ding!! Guilty

  7. KaiserSoze says: Mar 25, 2010 8:00 PM

    LMAO
    You’re reaching now Florio.
    Give it up.

  8. TFBuckFutter says: Mar 25, 2010 8:01 PM

    What pisses me off about this is that there WAS a crime and it should be fairly prosecutable since he ADMITTED to it.
    Someone who is intoxicated can’t legally give consent to sexual interaction. If she had a .20 BAC that doesn’t ABSOLVE him. It does the opposite. Even if she was the aggressor. (And don’t start with “what if he was drunk too?” because everyone knows that “I was drunk” isn’t a defense to a crime regardless of what it is).
    The crime is called Rape by Intoxication, and it IS a crime (they just probably aren’t even aware of it in less than enlightened states like Georgia).
    They teach that on just about every college campus.

  9. Skin_Flute says: Mar 25, 2010 8:15 PM

    It’s obvious that the accuser is lying. We all know that Big Ben likes the penis.

  10. ookie says: Mar 25, 2010 8:15 PM

    your bias on this story is really showing Florio

  11. NFLMMAfan says: Mar 25, 2010 8:15 PM

    Wait for the medical facts on her head injury. Simple slip and fall or was she smashed into the wall or sink by a tall, heavy, powerful man?
    Focus there Florio. Crime or no crime?

  12. ninerblitz says: Mar 25, 2010 8:16 PM

    So this appears to be more a “where there is smoke there is fire” kind of a case.
    Was the girl drinking? Yes. Was she dragged to the bathroom? No.
    What happened in that room is between Ben and accuser.
    Unfortunately, the accuser is making this worse for real victims. If she were my daughter, someone would be filing assault files against me for giving her a stone cold stunner.

  13. jediwrstlr says: Mar 25, 2010 8:16 PM

    Your a moron. You are blinded by your hate for Big ben, and you really just dont know what your talking about. The guy is a laywer, he is closer to being an analyist than you are. Hmmm…legam matter, do I want the lawyer or the crappy sports writter?
    Why dont you write an “article” on how the girl was underage, drinking, and how her own friends and sorority sisters don’t support her statements? Ben might have put himself in a bad situation, but this girl broke the law doing just that. Putting herself in a bad situation.
    Oh and sexual contact is any contact of a sexual nature, even as simple as grabbing her butt.
    You make all your articles read like TMZ of the sports world, god your a douchebag.

  14. NoKoolaidCowboy says: Mar 25, 2010 8:17 PM

    Sooooo…why exactly is she being referred to as the “victim” if no crime was committed?

  15. bigdaddywaite says: Mar 25, 2010 8:18 PM

    Florio, I’m beginning to worry about you! You are absolutely obsessed with this story. Give it a rest until you have some real news

  16. Jamson64 says: Mar 25, 2010 8:22 PM

    Thanks for clarifying that. I know you are all about fairness. (sarc) Why don’t you clean up your comments section? Classless.

  17. Occam says: Mar 25, 2010 8:25 PM

    I wonder if our founding fathers ever envisioned that people’s compliance or defiance to the “innocent until proven guilty” concept would depend entirely on which sports team they rooted for. So sad.

  18. Jamson64 says: Mar 25, 2010 8:34 PM

    Hmmm PFT has a relationship with NBC . MSNBC also does. Neither has class. Surprise.

  19. footballisking says: Mar 25, 2010 8:35 PM

    At the end of the day this lawyer you vented over will be correct….charges will NEVER be filed

  20. The1too says: Mar 25, 2010 8:37 PM

    jediwrstlr says:
    March 25, 2010 8:16 PM
    Your a moron. You are blinded by your hate for Big ben, and you really just dont know what your talking about. The guy is a laywer, he is closer to being an analyist than you are. Hmmm…legam matter, do I want the lawyer or the crappy sports writter?
    So OJ didn’t do it because his lawyer said he is innocent??? A lawyer would never spin something for their client would they? I’d believe a crappy sports writer over some scumbag lawyer any day.

  21. Rafterman says: Mar 25, 2010 8:38 PM

    Florio all these posts of yours can be collected by Ben’s lawyers. What you’ve been doing is slanderous.
    Have fun when they come after you.

  22. Dickcheese says: Mar 25, 2010 8:40 PM

    It’s retarded that people keep saying that no DNA is needed because he admitted to sexual contact. Absolutely retarded.
    Example: Big Ben admits to groping her boob, but she shows up with a cum stain on her dress.
    Maybe Florio can explain how his admission of groping boobies confirms that the cum is his.

  23. Bens Attorney says: Mar 25, 2010 8:40 PM

    Hey Florio, you call your self a legal analysist. Isnt that what you have been doing for days on the behalf of the “Poor Victim”. you have even said in one of your endless threads about this that Ben needs to pay her, And then you analyzed last night that he did. Then you had to retract and put your analysis on it today that it isnt going away.
    so isnt that the pot calling the kettle Just asking.

  24. KaiserSoze says: Mar 25, 2010 8:40 PM

    “# NoKoolaidCowboy says: March 25, 2010 8:17 PM
    Sooooo…why exactly is she being referred to as the “victim” if no crime was committed?”
    Because “victim” sells more news print and generates more page hits than “drunk person”, right Florio?

  25. Jamson64 says: Mar 25, 2010 8:41 PM

    Occam… great point. Jealousy will do that.

  26. The1too says: Mar 25, 2010 8:48 PM

    Occam says:
    March 25, 2010 8:25 PM
    I wonder if our founding fathers ever envisioned that people’s compliance or defiance to the “innocent until proven guilty” concept would depend entirely on which sports team they rooted for. So sad.
    I don’t know if Ben is guilty this time or not. But I do know that he has to be a complete moron to put himself in this situation again. If the casual sex thing isn’t working for him he shouldn’t be trying to get head in a bathroom in some bar. It’s too bad he doesn’t have someone calling the plays off the field for him too. You know it’s bad when your own head coach is afraid to get your back. He may not be guilty this time but the dude is obviously a dbag.

  27. RebaT.. says: Mar 25, 2010 8:51 PM

    Look how long the investigation is taking on that loser doctor in the Michael Jackson case. I’m not surprised it is taking time, otherwise it would be a open and shut deal.
    He ADMITTED to sex contact with her. Read the article in read and towards the bottom Sexual Battery is intimate touching without consent. Again, he did do that. What was his alcohol level at the time? You can’t tell me he wasn’t legally drunk. I imagine a couple times over. Why was a bodyguard blocking the way?
    Ben’s atty won’t let him be interviewed because he is doing damage control from Ben admitting he sexually touched her. If there is a payoff, that is as good as admitting it too. Why would he pay if he didn’t do anything? Save money? He’s paying that atty Garland a fortune now!

  28. RebaT.. says: Mar 25, 2010 8:57 PM

    Rafterman,
    Speaking something other than the truth is slander. Writing is is libel. Get it right.

  29. karmathaitch says: Mar 25, 2010 8:58 PM

    YES HE DESERVED TO DIE AND I HOPE HE BURNS IN HELL!!!

  30. bluestree says: Mar 25, 2010 9:01 PM

    TFBuckFutter; Compelling points. I think a part of this might turn on “who paid for her drinks?”, “who served her?” If this was my bar, I would be pissed. The potential for increased scrutiny by the authorities, especially if I made money serving underage college girls (even if they have fake id’s, there’s willfull blindness).
    Occam; I’m with you in spirit, but our system is very liberal in encouraging the expression of opinion, and one of the beautiful things about free speech is you get to see where some of your fellow citizens are coming from. And sometimes it can be scary.

  31. KaiserSoze says: Mar 25, 2010 9:04 PM

    “RebaT.. says: March 25, 2010 8:51 PM
    Look how long the investigation is taking on that loser doctor in the Michael Jackson case. I’m not surprised it is taking time, otherwise it would be a open and shut deal.
    He ADMITTED to sex contact with her.”
    Michael Jackson’s doctor had sex with the Georgia drunk too?
    Wow, she really gets around.

  32. Bens Attorney says: Mar 25, 2010 9:10 PM

    Read the article from ESPN sounds like bar owner is trying to cover his butt, first the video gets destroyed, and then he sees Ben talking to what may have been or may not have been the accuser, but then one of her friends told him that she thought her friend was in the bathroom with Ben but he didnt see them go in there. But she told him his bodyguard was blocking the door, well that is hearsay and inamissable.
    Then he says she told him her friend was drunk, again hearsay , inamissable. because he done messed up he said in the story that he never actually seen the accuser. He seen the woman that told him Ben was in the bathroom with the accuser leaving with some friends.. He said Ben entered at 1:04 a.m and he seen him talking to this woman for a while and they left at 1:45 a.m Dont think much happened in that little amount of time.
    the cops called and told him what was being said and he told them they were still there and only talked to Ben and his party briefly and it was done confirmed that they did not question anyone with Ben that night… Sounds like some backpeddling and some trying to cover the ol butts to me.
    So If you want us to believe that Ben is the big bad rapist dont post links that makes this case look weaker.

  33. JimmySmith says: Mar 25, 2010 9:14 PM

    Love all the Fixsburgh fans weighing in favor of Big Ben. Its bad enough the refs are in Rooney’s pocket, now you are asking police officers to look the other way.
    Look, the guy is a morally repugent human being that likes to force himself on women, call it what you want but most people find it disgusting. I have no idea if they have enough evidence to put him in jail but even if he gets away with the crime, he is still a 20 carat asshole.

  34. ItalianArmyGuy says: Mar 25, 2010 9:14 PM

    The owner of the “blocking the path” quote was the bar owner, who quickly explained that Ben’s buddies did not want customers snapping cell phone pix of Big Ben’s big “Johnson” as he tried to take a leak in their toilet.
    Put it in its proper context, Florio, and stop trying to sell these poor, impressionable fans on your Steeler-hating, Patriot-SpyGate-Belicheat-loving version of the “truth”.
    Otherwise, Florio, in the words of my favorite nihilist, “We come back tomorrow and we cut off YOUR Johnson”.
    “and maybe we stomp on it and squoosh it, Lebowski [Florio].”

  35. dirtyredd says: Mar 25, 2010 9:17 PM

    Big Ben is a sex offender.

  36. realitypolice says: Mar 25, 2010 9:19 PM

    The crime is called Rape by Intoxication, and it IS a crime (they just probably aren’t even aware of it in less than enlightened states like Georgia).
    ===================
    That is a state by state law and not automatically applicable in all states. Are you positive the law exists in the state of Georgia? I find it hard to believe Georgia law enforcement officials wouldn’t know about it.

  37. LeeB says: Mar 25, 2010 9:21 PM

    Hey kids,
    How do you muck up any future investigation about your future just in case misdeeds a la Ben way and I don’t mean Michael’s rat.
    1. Set up a foundation that donates money to the local PBA of the town you will be visiting.
    2. Cops make on an average of what $55 – $60 k depending on the town you are visiting. Sooooo, hire a few of them as bodyguard for twice that much each.
    3. Make sure the tape is accidently recorded over.
    Commissioner, you better get on with this and quit dragging your feet. Rape is more serious than doggy misdeed. Can’t hide this no more.
    Investigate that Florio.
    Investigate that Florio.

  38. realitypolice says: Mar 25, 2010 9:23 PM

    RebaT says:
    Read the article in read and towards the bottom Sexual Battery is intimate touching without consent. Again, he did do that.
    ======================
    How do you know there was no consent? Were you present during the incident?

  39. Kaz says: Mar 25, 2010 9:27 PM

    It’s retarded that people keep saying that no DNA is needed because he admitted to sexual contact. Absolutely retarded.
    Example: Big Ben admits to groping her boob, but she shows up with a cum stain on her dress.
    Maybe Florio can explain how his admission of groping boobies confirms that the cum is his.
    ________
    So he takes her in the bathroom and all he does is “grope her boob”? Boooooo he could have done that on the dance floor….

  40. RebaT.. says: Mar 25, 2010 9:35 PM

    @BensAtty
    He said Ben entered at 1:04 a.m and he seen him talking to this woman for a while and they left at 1:45 a.m Dont think much happened in that little amount of time.
    _______________________________
    For most men, that’s all it takes.

  41. Bens Attorney says: Mar 25, 2010 9:38 PM

    @ Italian Armyguy The owner of the “blocking the path” quote was the bar owner, who quickly explained that Ben’s buddies did not want customers snapping cell phone pix of Big Ben’s big “Johnson” as he tried to take a leak in their toilet.
    Put it in its proper context, Florio, and stop trying to sell these poor, impressionable fans on your Steeler-hating, Patriot-SpyGate-Belicheat-loving version of the “truth”.
    Otherwise, Florio, in the words of my favorite nihilist, “We come back tomorrow and we cut off YOUR Johnson”.
    “and maybe we stomp on it and squoosh it, Lebowski [Florio].”
    LMAO that is funny, Great post…

  42. Klytus says: Mar 25, 2010 9:45 PM

    More importantly, there’s no reason to regard as persuasive or unbiased the opinion of a lawyer who has a client with an obvious interest in seeing this thing go away.
    Yes, but he is a police officer with some experience at his job. This can hardly be the first litigation he’s been involved in. Micheal Santicola may be speaking from experience?
    I agree there is there some C.Y.A. going on. The GBI saying “no comment” with regard to a withdrawn request for DNA. The accuser’s lawyers saying that she is cooperating with law enforcement after a story suggesting that she didn’t want to be reinterviewed.
    The most interesting part for me is that all this took place after Commissioner Goodell said he was going to talk to Ben. (?)
    GO STEELERS!

  43. FoozieGrooler says: Mar 25, 2010 9:46 PM

    “# RebaT.. says: March 25, 2010 9:35 PM
    For most men, that’s all it takes.”
    I could see in your case, they just want to get it over with.

  44. dhunter says: Mar 25, 2010 9:50 PM

    U dudes are just WAMKO”s, Just Saying

  45. Dickcheese says: Mar 25, 2010 9:52 PM

    Reba T,
    I would imagine that Ben admitted to consentual sexual contact. If he admitted to sexual assault he would have been arrested on the spot. If I read your tired ass comment about the same meaningless fact, then I will go crosseyed.
    Sidenote – I’ve balled 2 chicks in a bathroom before, and neither one of them came into the bathroom to tell me no. And if they prosecuted every man who balled a drunk chick then there would be like 3 men who aren’t sex offender.

  46. snnyjcbs says: Mar 25, 2010 10:05 PM

    The whole thing is a joke, charged or not Big Ben will go down as such a hard up guy that he has to assault women to try and bed them.
    What guy in his position needs to assault a women to bed them? You would have to beat them off with a stick, unless you are a Big Stupid looking jerk which fits Big Ben to a T.
    And that goes for his suck ass guards as well. Never could see why any person would be so thrilled to be able to see one of these players up close. Many think they know these clowns because they watch them on TV. You know nothing about them and many, not all but many besides not having much between the Ears are a bore to hang with.

  47. TFBuckFutter says: Mar 25, 2010 10:06 PM

    “realitypolice says:
    March 25, 2010 9:19 PM
    That is a state by state law and not automatically applicable in all states. Are you positive the law exists in the state of Georgia? I find it hard to believe Georgia law enforcement officials wouldn’t know about it.”
    http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/the-crime-of-rape-in-georgia
    Notably: Sex with woman whose will is temporarily lost from intoxication, or unconsciousness arising from use of drugs or other cause, or sleep, is rape. Griffin v. State, 282 Ga. 215 (2007)
    http://www.rossandpines.com/CM/FSDP/PracticePage/Criminal-Law/Sex-Offenses.asp
    Also these Georgia based attorneys:
    “Q: Is consent a defense?
    A: Consent may be a defense to sex crimes, in some cases. However, some individuals are not considered able to consent to sex under the law. For those individuals, even if they explicitly agree, their agreement is not legally valid. For example, minors, the mentally disabled and unconscious or intoxicated people (even if they willingly became intoxicated) typically cannot provide valid consent.”
    I think the law is pretty consistent across the states, however I think some of the less progressive states still like to play the blame the victim game. We’ve had clear cut cases here in Florida where they haven’t pursued it because people don’t understand the law (including those in law enforcement).

  48. RebaT.. says: Mar 25, 2010 10:12 PM

    Dickcheese
    That’s pathetic you have so little respect for women and can’t believe you would express that. PIG Does your wife know this?

  49. GoBrowns19 says: Mar 25, 2010 10:13 PM

    Guilty as charged! That’s what I think at least. Lock the criminal up.

  50. Holeinone09 says: Mar 25, 2010 10:15 PM

    @Florio says: More importantly, there’s no reason to regard as persuasive or unbiased the opinion of a lawyer who has a client with an obvious interest in seeing this thing go away.
    * * * *
    Then Mike, why in the blue hell did you even bother to report this damn tidbit on PFT (Putrid Florio Tripe)? Now I do understand that this story is juicier than any free agent or draft pick news that you may be forced to focus on. But it is amazing the depths you are going to to continue the non-stop lunatic fringe in their drooling and spewing hate over this when no charges have yet been filed. For example, I am sure everyone enjoyed the following post her tonight:
    @karmathaitch says:
    March 25, 2010 8:58 PM
    YES HE DESERVED TO DIE AND I HOPE HE BURNS IN HELL!!!

  51. RebaT.. says: Mar 25, 2010 10:17 PM

    Then go crosseyed buddy. LOL
    PIG I would have NEVER had anything to do with you knowing what you just wrote. I have more respect for myself. Your poor wife. I feel bad for her now.

  52. Deb says: Mar 25, 2010 10:19 PM

    @TFBuckFutter …
    Yeah, they’re doing a great job of teaching Victim 101 to college girls. You go to a party, you can drink all you want, and slobber on any in the room. Go home with any guy who strikes your fancy, crawl into bed and do whatever. Wake up hungover and full of regret? Shoot, it wasn’t your fault. It was Rape by Alcohol. You’re not responsible for your body. That’s his job. Never mind that he was drunk out of his skull and you didn’t utter one word of complaint. Too bad. You were too drunk to consent and he should have known better. Call the cops. Make the accusation. Ruin his reputation. Get him thrown out of school. Toss him in prison if you can.
    That is a slap in the face to those of us who actually fought our attackers.

  53. jigga44 says: Mar 25, 2010 10:21 PM

    Buck Fig Ben!!!!

  54. realitypolice says: Mar 25, 2010 10:23 PM

    LeeB says:
    March 25, 2010 9:21 PM
    Investigate that Florio.
    Investigate that Florio.
    =======================
    Um………….Florio never investigates anything. Never has, never will. All he does is scour the intergoogles for other peoples’ articles and grabs whatever controversial stuff he can from them. He then adds his nonsensical opinions solely to generate responses.

  55. Steeler-lady says: Mar 25, 2010 10:25 PM

    Guys dont listen to Reba.. .. lol we all know her type.Shes trying to live out the best night of her sexlife all over again.
    Reba even if Ben was drunk.. hes allowed.. HES OF AGE! But i love how you only believe in half of what you read.. several reports state witnesses said Ben wasnt even drinking..I notice you skipped that part.
    Stop being an ignorant bitch n let the facts speak for themselves.Fact-NO DNA….Fact-She was drunk off her ass and fell…Ben agreed to talk to police and give DNA -FACT Stop making up your same BULLSHIT.
    By the way if she takes money then its clear she just wants MONEY………..
    The investigation could be taking LONGER cus they are struggling to make a case… Not to mention this “victim” has been busy at a sorority party.LOL Sounds soo devastating to me.
    LOL @his attorney wont allow him to talk.. LOL i guess you missed that story too.. Lol She wasnt talking to the police either.. She didnt show up to a SCHEDULED meeting with the police.. But i guess thats okay huh?
    Im about tired of your fake ass..Isnt it about time for you to hit the street corner?

  56. Deb says: Mar 25, 2010 10:27 PM

    @Everyone ….
    The police incident report, available online, said the act was “sexual manipulation.” No definition has been provided.
    The police said in their press conference there was no rape or intercourse.
    The police confirmed to Carl Prine of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review that THEY RECOVERED NO DNA SAMPLE FROM THE ACCUSER.
    The only report that Ben had sexual contact with the accuser came via a television report quoting an unnamed source.
    Um, Florio, Kelly Naqi’s report about the bodyguard blocking the path … she got that from a manager at the club who said he got it from a girl who said she was a friend of the accuser. Wow, talk about reliable sourcing. Impressive.

  57. Big BrEasy says: Mar 25, 2010 10:28 PM

    TFBuckFutter says:
    March 25, 2010 8:01 PM
    What pisses me off about this is that there WAS a crime and it should be fairly prosecutable since he ADMITTED to it.
    Someone who is intoxicated can’t legally give consent to sexual interaction. If she had a .20 BAC that doesn’t ABSOLVE him. It does the opposite. Even if she was the aggressor. (And don’t start with “what if he was drunk too?” because everyone knows that “I was drunk” isn’t a defense to a crime regardless of what it is).
    The crime is called Rape by Intoxication, and it IS a crime (they just probably aren’t even aware of it in less than enlightened states like Georgia).
    They teach that on just about every college campus.
    ————————————————–
    Sounds like someone is mad that the “wine and dine” didnt work for him. Don’t sweat my friend, dont sweat. If you offer Pervy Harvin a Zima no doubt he will bend over, even for you.

  58. Occam says: Mar 25, 2010 10:34 PM

    The1too says:
    “I don’t know if Ben is guilty this time or not. But I do know that he has to be a complete moron to put himself in this situation again.”
    Amen to that. Anyone should concede that man is a fool. Proclaiming guilt or innocence based on your football-rooting interests is simply a different level of stupidity.
    bluestree says:
    “and one of the beautiful things about free speech is you get to see where some of your fellow citizens are coming from. And sometimes it can be scary.”
    Double amen to that. Scary more often than not. :)

  59. buck_u_pack_haterz says: Mar 25, 2010 10:37 PM

    you steelers fans are actually really pathetic, this story stinks to high hell in a number of different ways and you’re all just turning your noses the other way. The security footage got tapped over? jee what a coincidence? I know some of you steelers fans know this story is just not adding up, but the ones that are on here defending the guy are just plain sad. The only other organization I’ve ever respected next to the packers was the steelers but this changes things big time.

  60. queenie says: Mar 25, 2010 10:41 PM

    Dickcheese says:
    Sidenote – I’ve balled 2 chicks in a bathroom before, and neither one of them came into the bathroom to tell me no. And if they prosecuted every man who balled a drunk chick then there would be like 3 men who aren’t sex offender.
    —————————————-
    and that boys and girls concludes today’s show!

  61. YourTeamHasLessRings says: Mar 25, 2010 10:43 PM

    Point I stuggle with is he could have any 6 chicks (drunk or otherwise) in a hotub at anytime (probably does right now)….when did the bathroom at a wing joint become a high percentage play for getting some good action for a guy with lots of coin?

  62. RebaT.. says: Mar 25, 2010 10:53 PM

    Ben needs to keep to call girls.

  63. RebaT.. says: Mar 25, 2010 10:54 PM

    When Ben is no longer a QB, we’ll see how many girls are in the hot tub… ZEEERRROOOO! He’s ugly.

  64. Deb says: Mar 25, 2010 11:01 PM

    Hmmm … I drop by before signing off and see you’ve posted up to 10:43. Wait a minute. I posted at approx. 10:20 and 10:28 (I’ve learned the hard way to save my PFT posts). So are you censoring or what? Do I need to repost? It’s really confusing when comments made after mine come up before mine. What’s the deal?

  65. BuffaloStampede says: Mar 25, 2010 11:10 PM

    Haha, wow Ben wouldn’t have to assault anyone if he would just let all these posters with hard-ons for him live out their fantasies.
    BREAKING NEWS: You were NOT in the Georgia club with him…Gonna have to let this legal process play out. And yes, that means you might find out the ugly truth about your precious Ben, and the truth, as they say, hurts.

  66. Deb says: Mar 25, 2010 11:11 PM

    @buck_u_pack_haterz …
    Before you judge everyone so harshly, it helps if you know the authorities released long ago that there were no security cameras in the bathroom area where the alleged assault occurred nor in the VIP area where Ben and his group spent the evening. So there could not be any film of the incident nor of Ben and the girl hanging out prior to the incident.
    There could, however, be footage of the club serving drinks to underage patrons. The nightclub hired an attorney as soon as this thing broke. The club owner faces his own legal issues. Apparently other Georgia nightclubs have been closed for serving underage patrons.
    Before you decide we are all turning our noses and blindly defending our QB, please try to follow the facts of these cases. I would like to believe my QB is innocent … but I don’t do anything blindly … not for anyone.

  67. Deb says: Mar 25, 2010 11:15 PM

    Since you seem to have lost my two earlier posts and I need to call it a night, I’ll assume it’s not censorship and repost:
    @Everyone ….
    The police incident report, available online, said the act was “sexual manipulation.” No definition has been provided.
    The police said in their press conference there was no rape or intercourse.
    The police confirmed to Carl Prine of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review that THEY RECOVERED NO DNA SAMPLE FROM THE ACCUSER.
    The only report that Ben had sexual contact with the accuser came via a television report quoting an unnamed source.
    Um, Florio, Kelly Naqi’s report about the bodyguard blocking the path … she got that from a manager at the club who said he got it from a girl who said she was a friend of the accuser. Wow, talk about reliable sourcing. Impressive.

  68. Raider Pride says: Mar 25, 2010 11:16 PM

    YourTeamHasLessRings says:
    March 25, 2010 10:43 PM
    Point I stuggle with is he could have any 6 chicks (drunk or otherwise) in a hotub at anytime (probably does right now)….when did the bathroom at a wing joint become a high percentage play for getting some good action for a guy with lots of coin?
    ———————————————–
    Now…. That is a fact, and perhaps the most disturbing aspect of Ben’s actions.
    Well Stated… “YourTeamHasLessRings.”
    Good on you.

  69. Deb says: Mar 25, 2010 11:17 PM

    @TFBuckFutter …
    Yeah, they’re doing a great job of teaching Victim 101 to college girls. You go to a party, you can drink all you want, and slobber on any man in the room. Go home with any guy who strikes your fancy, crawl into bed and do whatever. Wake up hungover and full of regret? Shoot, it wasn’t your fault. It was Rape by Alcohol. You’re not responsible for your body. That’s his job. Never mind that he was drunk out of his skull, too, and you didn’t utter one word of complaint. Too bad. You were too drunk to consent and he should have known better. Call the cops. Make the accusation. Ruin his reputation. Get him thrown out of school. Toss him in prison if you can.
    That is a slap in the face to those of us who actually fought our attackers.

  70. Cereal Blogger says: Mar 26, 2010 12:43 AM

    No matter the outcome of this, one thing is certain…..Florio is a tool

  71. mr_snrub says: Mar 26, 2010 1:28 AM

    Sounds like she was willing/consented to some sort of physical contact, but at some point changed her mind (wisened up?) and refused to go any further. Benny isn’t the type of guy to take ‘no’, and people rarely slip and fall in bathrooms and beat up their faces. I don’t care how drunk they are.
    Step off a curb and smash face with the pavement? That’s one thing. Never heard of a bathroom sneaking up on someone.

  72. Siggy00 says: Mar 26, 2010 1:57 AM

    Yeah but what did the accuser say when she said she was assaulted that made them state they wanted DNA three days after this was reported, and AFTER Ben admitted they had contact?
    Ben admitted they had contact that night. They still wanted his DNA three days later.
    Now they don’t.
    That tells me the rape kit didn’t provide anything.
    Seems to me that maybe her “version” of the events (while being drunk) don’t match up with the evidence (or lack of) in this case?
    Then she won’t talk to police, but she was well enough to go on a retreat in the mountains.
    Then the story comes out yesterday that she was busted trying to pass a fake ID in the same club WEEKS before she met Ben.
    Not the most credible witness it appears at this time, no?

  73. pokerpro7s says: Mar 26, 2010 2:28 AM

    “Rape by intoxication?” You’ve got to be kidding me. Underaged girls getting sloppy drunk and hooking uo with random guys is a nightly occurance on any college campus, or high school for that matter. Anybody who doesn’t realize this is extremely naive. If Ben did in fact have sex with this girl he did the same thing any single, 28 year old, red-blooded American male would have done with a drunk college girl coming onto him. Give up the witch hunt already.

  74. robhug71 says: Mar 26, 2010 4:09 AM

    @LessRings: Anyone who has followed Roethlisberger the past couple years should know that the Steelers QB is all about power, fame and fortune.
    His activitites that crazy night in Georgia wasn’t about having sex. It was about acting like a rock star, acting like a Big Shot. It was about him being a celebrity among peons.
    Of course he could be in a hot tub at home with six chicks, but where’s the excitement in that?
    A real NFL quarterback would’ve celebrated his birthday in a pinstripe suit, at a five-star restaurant with a pretty (adult) blond on his arm.
    Roethlisberger, however, selected a dumpy college bar where he would be the center of attention. I’m surprised he didn’t invite ESPN to tag along.

  75. Chapnasty2 says: Mar 26, 2010 7:13 AM

    “Unfortunately, the accuser is making this worse for real victims. If she were my daughter, someone would be filing assault files against me for giving her a stone cold stunner.”
    PHENOMINAL!!!!

  76. Jack Burton says: Mar 26, 2010 8:41 AM

    “That is a slap in the face to those of us who actually fought our attackers.”
    I fought my attacker and all I got was this lousy shirt.

  77. NoRingsForYou says: Mar 26, 2010 8:58 AM

    I’ve ripped Florio many times, but in this case he’s right. Steelers fans jumping on Florio for pointing out an obvious fact are showing their true black and yellow colors. Big Ben’s new name should be Big Piece of Crap. IF it’s true that he forced himself on someone while his body guard blocked the door, they both belong in jail. And Big Piece of Crap should be banned from the NFL.

  78. FoozieGrooler says: Mar 26, 2010 9:09 AM

    “# RebaT.. says: March 25, 2010 10:53 PM
    Ben needs to keep to call girls.”
    Ooooh OK… NOW it’s becoming clear.
    You aren’t just here to rag on Ben ad nauseum,
    You’re just trying to drum up some business!

  79. Whatever897 says: Mar 26, 2010 9:28 AM

    mr_snrub says:
    March 26, 2010 1:28 AM
    Sounds like she was willing/consented to some sort of physical contact, but at some point changed her mind (wisened up?) and refused to go any further. Benny isn’t the type of guy to take ‘no’, and people rarely slip and fall in bathrooms and beat up their faces. I don’t care how drunk they are.
    Step off a curb and smash face with the pavement? That’s one thing. Never heard of a bathroom sneaking up on someone.
    Umm… you don’t get out much, do you mr_snrub? I have one friend in particular who ended up with a concussion because she thinks someone put a date rape pill in her drink and passed out in the bathroom – hitting the sink on her way out.
    Now, before everyone jumps on THAT bandwagon, I do not believe Ben Roethlisberger put a date rape drug in the girl’s drink. However, if she was stone cold sh!t-faced, she could’ve stumbled around and cracked her face.
    Let’s stick to facts people. I’m a Steeler fan, but I firmly believe Ben thinks he’s king – and it’s the NFL world that does that to him. Look at Willie Parker… We (family) thought he was awesome until we went to training camp one year and saw just how full of himself he was (and he’s just ONE example). Ben needs a handler who shows him how to grow up, handle his money, and stop talking like a ghetto kid. He needs to show some intelligence and settle down. I don’t believe he ever ‘forced’ anyone to do anything with him. However, he IS guilty of extremely poor judgement and a God complex.

  80. Whatever897 says: Mar 26, 2010 9:37 AM

    One more thing… just to level set everyone…
    Florio IS a lawyer, who just happens to be a sports writer as well. I think this story is being beat to death, but I can’t question his knowledge on some of these subjects.

  81. noll1 says: Mar 26, 2010 9:39 AM

    Well if he did it he needs to do his time. If he didnt his rep is trash now anyway. The only winners here are the lawyers and media. To all the Steeler haters out there remember the opposite of love is not hate its indifference.

  82. HamBurghlar says: Mar 26, 2010 9:41 AM

    @Foozie: Im dyin at your first post to Reba… LOL… hahahahaaha.
    I just wish common sense prevailed in this world, but it’s sure as hell not going to come from a Roethlisberger thread. *sigh*

  83. clubfoot says: Mar 26, 2010 9:57 AM

    Florio, you had no trouble with the “source” when it came to the Colts piping in noise to the RCA Dome. You cited a brother’s cousin of a hot vendor.

  84. Holeinone09 says: Mar 26, 2010 10:03 AM

    It is time for Georgia to come to a conclusion on this matter. What the hell more could they possibly find after WEEKS? This ain’t a cold case murder investigation for goodness sakes. It is a shame that the Andy of Mayberry police force down there can’t come to a decision on this. They have had adequate time to review everything and talk to everybody. Ben’s reputation is slaughtered right now and partially his fault. But he deserves a speedy conclusion in this as well, one way or the other.
    Make up your minds, Georgia!

  85. jlbay says: Mar 26, 2010 10:03 AM

    TFBuckFutter says:
    “Someone who is intoxicated can’t legally give consent to sexual interaction. If she had a .20 BAC that doesn’t ABSOLVE him. It does the opposite. Even if she was the aggressor. (And don’t start with “what if he was drunk too?” because everyone knows that “I was drunk” isn’t a defense to a crime regardless of what it is).
    The crime is called Rape by Intoxication, and it IS a crime (they just probably aren’t even aware of it in less than enlightened states like Georgia).”
    You should really check the facts before spouting off on subjects you know nothing about.
    Rape and other sex crime laws differ from state to state, in one state the legal age of consent might be 16, whereas in another it might be 18 . . . if you bothered to check you would know that Georgia doesn’t not have any sort of intoxication based sex crime laws. Therefore the ACCUSER’S blood alcohol level does not come into play in this instance.
    As for this entire post . . . it is a net nothing . . . initially I felt that Ben was probably guilty . . . but as this situation progresses my opinion is starting to change . . . the girl is now refusing to cooperate with the police . . . Florio points out that DNA is only useful when the accused claims to not have had any contact with the accuser . . . but if that is the case then why did the police or GBI initially ask for a DNA sample? They must have thought it would have provided some insight into the case . . . or thought that it would create some leverage to press on Ben’s camp . . . I don’t think investigative agencies are in the habit of requesting DNA for absolutely no reason . . . so the fact that they have back peddled on this request (especially when taking into consideration with the lack of cooperation by the ACCUSER) sure sounds like a posative development for Ben.
    Florio I have defended your posts in the past, regarding this investigation, but it really does appear as if you have some sort of agenda with they way you putting a spin on what you publish. You seem to dismiss anything that comes out that seems to help Ben’s case, and emphasis or insert complete speculation to try to paint the guy in the worst possible light. Look in the end Ben is at least guilty of being a complete dumbass . . . just report the facts and leave out your slanted views . . . they will prove out that either Ben is a sex offender or at the very least a no more intelligent than a chimpmonk (Simon, Theodore and Alvin please forgive me) . . . either way the guy will come out of this think look really bad.

  86. Bdrunk says: Mar 26, 2010 10:05 AM

    buck_u_pack_haterz says:
    March 25, 2010 10:37 PM
    “The only other organization I’ve ever respected next to the packers was the steelers but this changes things big time.”
    UHOH! Sh*t is hittin’ the fan now.

  87. suvantar says: Mar 26, 2010 10:23 AM

    RebaT says:
    Read the article in read and towards the bottom Sexual Battery is intimate touching without consent. Again, he did do that.
    ======================
    How do you know there was no consent? Were you present during the incident?
    ******************************************
    Her point is that a person without the capacity to give consent cannot give consent. A person who has either been given a date rape drug or, in some places, is too inebriated to give informed consent cannot legally do so.
    It is a very difficult thing to prove without corroboration and most prosecutors will not indict without significant supporting evidence in those types of cases.
    The difference between the two examples above is generally the implication in the minds of jurors. It is generally assumed that if someone slips another person a date rape drug, the person has engaged in some sort of nefarious, criminal activity. It is generally assumed that if someone takes advantage of a girl who is already drunk in a bar when they meet that the person may be a little bit scuzzy, but that the girl voluntarily put herself into that condition.
    There’s a world of difference between forcing someone into a condition where she lacks the capacity for judgment or the ability to resist and taking advantage of her putting herself into that condition. It is not necessarily a legal distinction, but any prosecutor worth his salt considers the likelihood of conviction as the primary factor on whether to proceed with a case.

  88. suvantar says: Mar 26, 2010 10:32 AM

    Florio points out that DNA is only useful when the accused claims to not have had any contact with the accuser . . . but if that is the case then why did the police or GBI initially ask for a DNA sample?
    ******************************************
    That’s relatively easy to answer. They would ask for a DNA sample if the hospital staff found any substances on her the night of the incident that might include the DNA of her attacker. That is not just reserved for semen, of course. If she, say, vomited on herself, the lab would run tests on the vomit to ensure it was hers.
    If they found a substance that wasn’t hers, they would want a comparison sample from BR to test to see if it matched the substance that wasn’t hers.
    And the reason they would do this proactively is because lab testing, if you are the Midgeville Police Department rather than NCSI or the FBI is something that takes time. So imagine this scenario:
    They send the samples out for testing and it takes a couple to three weeks to get all the results back. So no everyone on these boards is saying, “What is taking so long? Why are they dragging this out?”
    Now, when the tests come back, there is something there that isn’t hers. But they have no comparison sample. They don’t know who it belongs to. So now… after not having charged him for 2-3 weeks, they NOW ask for his DNA sample. And his sample goes to the lab and the carousel begins again.
    So then a month and a half later, everyone is screaming about how they are publicity hounds and dragging out ‘their time in the spotlight’ and so forth.
    Doing a criminal investigation takes time. Especially if you do it right and decide not to half-ass it because you’re afraid the public might get impatient with you.
    Asking for a DNA sample from him proactively was a smart thing to do. It demonstrated the level of cooperation he would show, (little), and would have saved some time had the results of her lab tests come back with somebody else’s DNA somewhere on her person.

  89. suvantar says: Mar 26, 2010 10:56 AM

    You should really check the facts before spouting off on subjects you know nothing about.
    Rape and other sex crime laws differ from state to state, in one state the legal age of consent might be 16, whereas in another it might be 18 . . . if you bothered to check you would know that Georgia doesn’t not have any sort of intoxication based sex crime laws. Therefore the ACCUSER’S blood alcohol level does not come into play in this instance.
    ******************************************
    Yes. It does if the prosecutor chooses to pursue that angle, he would have some Georgia case law supporting that angle.
    “Sex with woman whose will is temporarily lost from intoxication, or unconsciousness arising from use of drugs or other cause, or sleep, is rape. Griffin v. State, 282 Ga. 215 (2007)”
    However, as I said above, it’s difficult to prove and juries in the south are typically unsympathetic to situations where they perceive that a victim is not really a victim.

  90. TFBuckFutter says: Mar 26, 2010 12:00 PM

    “suvantar says:
    March 26, 2010 10:56 AM
    However, as I said above, it’s difficult to prove and juries in the south are typically unsympathetic to situations where they perceive that a victim is not really a victim.”
    Like, for example, if they lack a penis or have a pecularly deep tan.

  91. Holeinone09 says: Mar 26, 2010 12:05 PM

    sunvantar, thanks for analysis of why it takes so long about DNA testing. Assuming you are right, since it is now reported that apparently there wasn’t anything to compare DNA to, meaning to me that there were no other substances found on the girl, what is the next excuse why it’s taking so long to come to a conclusion?

  92. WhatIsWrongWithYouPeople says: Mar 26, 2010 3:03 PM

    “More importantly, there’s no reason to regard as persuasive or unbiased the opinion of a lawyer who has a client with an obvious interest in seeing this thing go away.”
    Your just as biased. You make it blatantly obvious that you are completely against Roethlisberger. You completely object every other defense someone has for Roethlisberger. Your probably just your typical Steeler hater that wants them to get rid of Big Ben so they can stop winning.

  93. suvantar says: Mar 26, 2010 3:10 PM

    sunvantar, thanks for analysis of why it takes so long about DNA testing. Assuming you are right, since it is now reported that apparently there wasn’t anything to compare DNA to, meaning to me that there were no other substances found on the girl, what is the next excuse why it’s taking so long to come to a conclusion?
    *******************************************
    At this point, I would wager, though I am not inside the investigation obviously and cannot know what aspects of it are still under active investigation, that they are pretty close to making a decision one way or another. There are only a finite number of things to investigate in this matter.
    I would imagine that the delay is probably being caused because they believe that they have a case but that it is weak and the prosecutor would like something more concrete than what he has in order to move forward… ie, similarities in story between this accusor and the Nevada accusor or a stronger statement from one of the accusor’s friend about the locked door/guard aspect of it.
    However, remember I am only privy to the details that have emerged into the press. There are probably details that the police know that none of us do.
    However, to answer the question in brief, I don’t think it’s an excuse as much as I believe that it’s more like waffling. They are hoping that something more will materialize because they suspect that he committed the crime, but know that their evidence is too weak to prove he did so.

  94. Deb says: Mar 26, 2010 4:15 PM

    @Whatever897 …
    I have all the respect in the world for people who set a goal and work to achieve it–and that includes Mike Florio for going to law school. But he was not a criminal defense attorney, and he’s admitted himself that many of these issues are outside his expertise. I had to study communication law when working toward my journalism degree. My brother is a topnotch criminal defense lawyer and even teaches law school courses. But his knowledge of comm law is limited because it’s not his area of practice or expertise.
    As for being a sports writer, yes, but don’t confuse that with sports reporting. He’s not contacting original sources or writing objective news articles. He’s blogging news tidbits and rumors mixed with provocative opinions. His writing articles are designed to elicit comments and page clicks. Don’t confuse news with commentary.

  95. Deb says: Mar 26, 2010 5:04 PM

    @TFBuckFutter …
    Are you kidding? Run some stats on conviction rates and the application of the death penalty and how often it’s carried out in the South. I’m a Southerner and death-penalty supporter, but the South isn’t exactly a hotbed of tolerance for the accused. We’re more likely to punish the innocent than let the guilty walk and that’s what concerns me. While you’re doing that research, why don’t you google false rape claims? Start with Tawana Brawley, Duke Lacrosse, Hofstra, Gary Dotson, William McCaffrey … here’s a good article:
    http://www.seattleweekly.com/content/printVersion/604983
    Many, many women have been brutalized by violent, dangerous, manipulative men. As a rape survivor, I understand that better than you do. But many women have made false rape claims for a variety of bizarre reasons. You think the promise of a big settlement isn’t an incentive?
    Read the evidence in Nevada. If he’s innocent there–and the evidence suggests he is–then nothing has been introduced to suggest predatory practices. Jackass does not equal abuser. One on-the-record witness says this was his first visit to the college town. The report about the bodyguard blocking the hallway came from a third-hand unnamed source. Reports of a head injury and consensual sex act came from an unnamed source. The police said there was no intercourse, no rape, and no DNA on the accuser. It’s been confirmed there were no cameras in the bathroom or VIP areas, so there was no reason related to this accusation for tapes to have been erased. (But the club might have recorded over evidence of underage drinking).
    We still don’t know what this girl alleges he did to her. The incident report only says “sexual manipulation.” So why don’t you cut the snark and wait for the facts before damning the man?

  96. Rafterman says: Mar 26, 2010 5:22 PM

    They need to end this now it’s been three frigging weeks and NOTHING is going to change. If they had any evidence he would have been charged already. There 15 minutes are long over.

  97. Deb says: Mar 27, 2010 6:31 PM

    @Rafterman …
    Don’t bank on that. The prosecutor could still file charges or refer the case to grand jury, which doesn’t convene until July. A grand jury would not be good news.
    Only the prosecutor presents evidence to the grand jury–the defense isn’t allowed to attend. The burden of proof is minimal. A grand jury could choose to indict on her say-so alone. The proceedings are sealed, so if the grand jury indicted, they could leave the public with the impression that there is significant evidence when there isn’t. Nothing more would be known until the trial.
    The prosecutor won’t go to the grand jury unless he already thinks he can win the case, but it is a possibility.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!