Skip to content

Cox, Thomas sued for sexual assault

103734752_crop_650x440 Getty Images

Like O.J. Simpson, former Broncos cornerback Perrish Cox avoided a conviction on criminal charges that appeared to be open and shut.  Like O.J. Simpson, Cox may be less fortunate in civil court.

According to the Associated Press, Cox and Broncos receiver Demaryius Thomas have been sued by a woman who became impregnated after allegedly passing out at Cox’s apartment in September 2010.  The DNA of the fetus matched Cox, who denied to police having sex with the woman.

Cox was nevertheless acquitted earlier this year.  He has since signed with the 49ers.

The specific civil claims against each man aren’t known; collectively, the suit advances legal theories including battery, sexual assault and battery, aiding and abetting tortious conduct, conspiracy, outrageous conduct, and negligence.  The lawsuit also reportedly makes reference to the allegation that the victim, who sued under a Jane Doe pseudonym, was drugged.

Suing both players will potentially pit the two of them against each other, forcing them to try to blame one another in order to escape liability.

Because Cox already has faced criminal charges, he can’t invoke the Fifth Amendment in the civil case.  Thomas, in theory, can rely upon the privilege against self-incrimination, since has not yet been charged with any crime.  Doing so, however, would serve only to make him look guilty in the eyes of the jury handling the civil case.

For both players, a much lower standard of proof applies in the civil context.  While a criminal conviction may occur only with proof beyond a reasonable doubt, civil liability applies based on a preponderance of the evidence, which means that the weight of the evidence must tip ever so slightly in the plaintiff’s direction for the case to be proven.

Permalink 34 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Denver Broncos, Rumor Mill, San Francisco 49ers, Top Stories
34 Responses to “Cox, Thomas sued for sexual assault”
  1. realitypolice says: Jun 10, 2012 11:35 PM

    It is irresponsible of you to continually push the notion that citizens invoking their constitutional rights makes them look guilty. If that is in fact true, then people like perpetuating that idea are largely to blame for it.

    You should know better and you should stop doing it.

  2. jerrysandusky1 says: Jun 10, 2012 11:38 PM

    OJ Simpson didn’t do it to begin with. I hope they counter sue for punitive damages.

  3. randallflagg52 says: Jun 10, 2012 11:43 PM

    realitypolice says:Jun 10, 2012 11:35 PM

    It is irresponsible of you to continually push the notion that citizens invoking their constitutional rights makes them look guilty. If that is in fact true, then people like perpetuating that idea are largely to blame for it.

    You should know better and you should stop doing it.

    ==================================

    He’s just pointing out a fact. In the jury’s eyes it would look like he is hiding somthing if he pled the 5th.

  4. milehigh85 says: Jun 10, 2012 11:55 PM

    I plead the fiz-ifth!! 1,2,3,4 Fifth!!!

  5. lolb23 says: Jun 10, 2012 11:56 PM

    Niners are the new Bengals.

  6. yssupasigninnamnotyep says: Jun 10, 2012 11:58 PM

    Good…can’t believe this POS got away with it to begin with. Hopefully she will get a bunch of HIS money to support HIS baby.

  7. thegreatgabbert says: Jun 11, 2012 12:08 AM

    How did that little slimeball Cox get off, and why is he still employed in the NFL?

  8. vince703 says: Jun 11, 2012 12:22 AM

    The truth is revealed now is time to face the consequnce. Players need to understand a law is a law can’t run away from the truth.

  9. timegambit says: Jun 11, 2012 12:26 AM

    Unfortunate last name for the defense.

  10. thegreatestofalltimes says: Jun 11, 2012 12:57 AM

    As an Eagles fan, I saw the headline and got INCREDIBLY WORRIED that they were talking about Fletcher Cox before the page loaded.

    Now I can breathe a sigh of relief. And watch the Phillies continue to suck. Late August can’t come any sooner.

  11. ken0west says: Jun 11, 2012 1:13 AM

    “It is irresponsible of you to continually push the notion that citizens invoking their constitutional rights makes them look guilty.”

    ummm. Thats what pleading the 5th makes you look, guilty. What % of time does a completely innocent person plead the 5th?

  12. jpietrefesa says: Jun 11, 2012 1:17 AM

    Absolutely ridiculous that the fetus matches his DNA and he got off and claims he never had sex with her. Total lying piece of trash it makes me sick that this scumbag can look everyone in the face and lie.

  13. hannahsdaddy says: Jun 11, 2012 1:39 AM

    Wait a minute. He denied ever having sex with the woman yet DNA evidence proves it was his? What is the question?

  14. howiehandles says: Jun 11, 2012 1:55 AM

    “OJ Simpson didn’t do it to begin with. I hope they counter sue for punitive damages.”

    And yet, the DNA is a match. Acquittal in a criminal trial doesn’t necessarily equal true innocence.

  15. straightfromthedonkeysmouth says: Jun 11, 2012 2:10 AM

    GUILITY HE MAY BE FOR BEING THERE WHEN IT HAPPENED AND THEY SAY A PERSON WHO STANDS BY AND DOES NOTHING IS AS GUILTY AS THE PERSON WHO DID IT. ME AS A DEVOTED BRONCO FAN FOR 26 YEARS AND KNOWING SOMEONE WHO EXPERIENCED THE SAME THING AND ENDED UP PREGNANT 2 BUT CAN’T REMEMBER THE ACTUAL ACT, IT TRULEY IS A VERY SICK AND SAD SITTUATION!

  16. jtmartinez34 says: Jun 11, 2012 2:17 AM

    Did anyone else pick up the reference to his DNA matching the “fetus”? Sounded odd to me at first read. Guess it means that the child was aborted, then tested for DNA match? If so, this story just keeps getting more sad.

  17. discosucs2005 says: Jun 11, 2012 3:02 AM

    “He’s just pointing out a fact. In the jury’s eyes it would look like he is hiding somthing if he pled the 5th.”

    Jurors are instructed not to interpret pleading the 5th as a sign of guilt. Whether they adhere to those instructions is a different story, but it’s worth noting.

  18. iainrwb says: Jun 11, 2012 3:12 AM

    I would have thought the jury eould be directed not to draw that conclusion.

    Besides which, looking bad for not giving evidence isn’t proof of anything. The jury still needs a credible alternative, supported by evidence, to find against him.

  19. jayniner says: Jun 11, 2012 3:31 AM

    And out come all the monday morning lawyers…

  20. asublimeday says: Jun 11, 2012 3:37 AM

    OJ Simpson didn’t do it to begin with. I hope they counter sue for punitive damages.
    ————–

    Thank you for brightening my day with a long, hearty laugh.

  21. thetwilightsown says: Jun 11, 2012 3:51 AM

    This will come to nothing because the Broncos signed Peyton Manning.

    Now, if these were Raiders players…

  22. tinazhoutest says: Jun 11, 2012 4:51 AM

    just a test

  23. totallyuselessme says: Jun 11, 2012 6:05 AM

    No it wouldn’t.

    It looks like he’s using his constitutional rights.

  24. dryzzt23 says: Jun 11, 2012 7:15 AM

    Clearly Cox lied and should be tried for perjury.

    I hope she wins big against these two losers. If the only woman they both can get, even though they’re NFL players, is a woman who passed out b/c of roofies given to her by Cox/Thomas, then they are truly bottom of the barrel losers.

  25. yzguy431 says: Jun 11, 2012 8:39 AM

    maybe there should be a 52 game season.

  26. jjbadd says: Jun 11, 2012 8:55 AM

    This is why this case is so sad. On one hand, if Cox is guilty, he should pay, on the other hand, one might assume this was the young lady’s motivation all along. It is certain he had sex with her, but was it rape? …and why did he deny it?

  27. greasybeerfart says: Jun 11, 2012 8:55 AM

    As a Niners fan, I wish we never signed this guy. I wish him the best and hope everything works out for him on/off the field, but the dude seems like he’s a lot of baggage.

  28. hendawg21 says: Jun 11, 2012 9:34 AM

    Well if i’m a juror, I would have to wonder if said victim wasn’t uh,um, well you know part of that world we call groupies??? It’s been well documented that these groupies know when, where and how to get next to these athletes…and it’s no secret what their motives might be…there comes a time when we have to stop feeling so sorry for these alledged victims as in some cases they are the true perpetrators. This by no means I excuse these athletes, however, we have to look at this real world like and understand as dumb as some athletes are it isn’t always them, but the groupie world they sucumb to…

  29. someidiotfromouthereintheprojects says: Jun 11, 2012 9:38 AM

    this case is a little foggy for me. did they ever find anything in her system that would prove she was knocked out and did they ever find if cox had at his disposal what it was?

  30. sschmiggles says: Jun 11, 2012 9:42 AM

    Given that the linked article claims that Cox’s own attorney admitted that the woman couldn’t remember having sex, I’m inclined to believe she was incapable of giving consent. Especially since he denied having sex with her to the police.

    Seems like a “legitimate” case of sexual assault. Surprise, surprise… many athletes feel entitled to a lot of things, and one of them is easy sex.

  31. mjkelly77 says: Jun 11, 2012 10:35 AM

    The San Francisco 49ers, led by a slap-happy coward … the new Bengals of the league.

  32. mjkelly77 says: Jun 11, 2012 10:40 AM

    thegreatgabbert says:Jun 11, 2012 12:08 AM

    How did that little slimeball Cox get off, and why is he still employed in the NFL?
    _________________

    He’s employed because the 49ers are desperate to win anything again.

  33. travelbavaria says: Jun 11, 2012 11:23 AM

    What are the charges? Was she raped?
    Hard to prove.

    Did she have sex with Cox ?
    Seems as if that’s a given.

    Having sex with someone who lies about it is no proof it was case of rape.

    Lying to the police can definitely be a problem to Cox.

    Of course, it begs the question of the motive of lying to the police.

  34. mitchitized says: Jun 11, 2012 12:08 PM

    The trouble here is that he got off the criminal charges, whether he broke the law or not.

    The civil case might find him guilty, but that will never touch his criminal record.

    So how differently is he going to be treated from any other NFL players that had accusations of sexual assault?

    And if he IS on the losing end of the civil case, does the fact he got off the hook on the criminal side mean the NFL has no grounds to punish him?

    Other NFL players have been suspended for up to four games without conviction – or even being summoned to court on proper charges. Will be important to see consistency from Herr Fuhrer.

Leave a Reply

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