More Details Emerge on Mike Ribeiro Case

[ScottM]

I'm just going to give the link without too much comment. It looks like this could get ugly, though.

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/dallas-stars/headlines/20150622-more-details-of-alleged-sexual-assault-by-ex-stars-forward-mike-ribeiro-emerge.ece

[J0e Th0rnton]

I'm just going to give the link without too much comment. It looks like this could get ugly, though.

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/dallas-stars/headlines/20150622-more-details-of-alleged-sexual-assault-by-ex-stars-forward-mike-ribeiro-emerge.ece

My question is, why is it going straight to civil suit?

 

For something like this, it should SHOULD be a criminal trial.

 

Civil suit is for monetary compensation.

 

One would think a victim of sexual assault would want to see the guy go behind bars where he cannot do it to anyone else rather than taking it to civil court where the only punishment will be him giving her money.

 

Innocent until proven guilty. Show the evidence. Ribiero is an easy target because of his past substance abuse, but I am not going to throw him under the bus until he is proven guilty. The fact that it is going civil suit instead of criminal charges sits wrong with me.

[ScottM]

I believe this is a criminal case. The fact that the complaint was filed in a district court suggests that.

[ScottM]

Check that. I just saw another article conforming it's a civil case. THAT does stink to high heaven. This will probably really nasty.

[J0e Th0rnton]

Check that. I just saw another article conforming it's a civil case. THAT does stink to high heaven. This will probably really nasty.

Yeah, it is just annoying and murks the waters even more. A victim usually would want criminal charges to put the guy behind bars and protect others. Just going for the money in a civil suit is............hard to swallow.

 

I am not defending arseholes who actually do abuse women, but Innocent until proven guilty.

[yave1964]

@ScottM@J0e Th0rnton

 

So now what with Ribiero? He had a solid season last year and the Preds are saying all the right things, quite frankly if he moves on their center position is a huge gaping hole. Mike Fisher and a bunch of nothing, and Fisher is really just a very good number three playing his heart out as a number two,

 Remember Voynov? Is there a difference between beating your girlfriend/wife and beating it while fondling the babysitter? What is the abuse level that has to occur before suspending a player while it plays out in the courts? And man oh man, are Ribiero and his old lady primed to be on a reality show or what? Read the whole list of these two morons escapades sometime just for fun. Truthfully, i cannot tell you, nor do i want to, what a single one of the Wings wives or GFs look like. Yet this woman is a trainwreck. If an article appears with her anywhere near the top, i simply have to click on it.

They are the Kardashians of the Hockey world.

[ScottM]

@ScottM@J0e Th0rnton

 

Is there a difference between beating your girlfriend/wife and beating it while fondling the babysitter? What is the abuse level that has to occur before suspending a player while it plays out in the courts?

 

Good question. I've long wondered how much is too much. None of the professional sports leagues seem to have the answer, and they frequently seem to be inconsistent. What's the answer? I don't know. I fully believe in innocent until proven guilty, but at what point is the evidence stacked too high?

[J0e Th0rnton]

Good question. I've long wondered how much is too much. None of the professional sports leagues seem to have the answer, and they frequently seem to be inconsistent. What's the answer? I don't know. I fully believe in innocent until proven guilty, but at what point is the evidence stacked too high?

Ray Rice? Video.

 

Voynov's case is more likely guilty to me. The wife was interviewed by cops and in bad shape beaten and later recanted

[radoran]

Voynov's case is more likely guilty to me.

 

So - "innocent until proven guilty" then, eh?

 

[ScottM]

@J0e Th0rnton Ray Rice had the video, and then the NFL completely mishandled the whole situation with the short suspension and the double jeopardy. I won't be surprised if they throw the book at the next guy and then see it turn out to be nothing. None of the leagues seem to have any idea of how to handle such things.

[radoran]

None of the leagues seem to have any idea of how to handle such things.

 

It's really tough because of the very nature of an "unproven accusation."

 

If, for example, we are going with "innocent until proven guilty" there's no way Voynov should be on suspension.

 

I won't be surprised if they throw the book at the next guy and then see it turn out to be nothing.

 

What happens if, for example, a superstar player on a playoff-bound team gets "accused" of something with a week left in the season. Automatic suspension? Suppose it is a fourth-line grinder? "case by case" basis?

 

Suppose Voynov gets exonerated - for whatever reasons - why did the NHL put the Kings in cap hell (before amending the rules) and almost without question adversely affect their Cup-defending season? Does Voynov have an actionable case against the league?

 

Imagine how that plays out long term... Voynov sues the league for suspending him and - again, just speculating - wins the case. If damages are awarded, how does the NHL handle the next case?

[ScottM]

 

What happens if, for example, a superstar player on a playoff-bound team gets "accused" of something with a week left in the season. Automatic suspension? Suppose it is a fourth-line grinder? "case by case" basis?

 

 

That kind of double standard could give someone like Voynov more ground to take action if he's found not guilt -- and rightfully so. I think you're right that he could have grounds for a lawsuit, and maybe the team would too. Why should anyone be treated any different? The guilty are guilty and the innocent are innocent regardless of skill or popularity.

 

Here's the thing: Voynov looks guilty, but how can any of us say so definitively? We don't have a video in this case. Maybe he did beat her down and she later recanted out of fear. Then again, maybe they had an argument and she got mad at him and wanted revenge. Then she had an accident and fell down some stairs. She looks battered, so there's her chance, right? Later she decided it wasn't such a good idea and recanted. The point is, we have no idea.

 

I thought about this on my drive into work, and this is my idea: let anyone play through the allegations, unless the court orders otherwise. Then, if they're found guilty, throw the book at them. That way, everyone knows before they do something like this that they won't be playing for a looooong time once it's proven.

[radoran]

That kind of double standard could give someone like Voynov more ground to take action if he's found not guilt -- and rightfully so. I think you're right that he could have grounds for a lawsuit, and maybe the team would too. Why should anyone be treated any different? The guilty are guilty and the innocent are innocent regardless of skill or popularity.

 

Here's the thing: Voynov looks guilty, but how can any of us say so definitively? We don't have a video in this case. Maybe he did beat her down and she later recanted out of fear. Then again, maybe they had an argument and she got mad at him and wanted revenge. Then she had an accident and fell down some stairs. She looks battered, so there's her chance, right? Later she decided it wasn't such a good idea and recanted. The point is, we have no idea.

 

I thought about this on my drive into work, and this is my idea: let anyone play through the allegations, unless the court orders otherwise. Then, if they're found guilty, throw the book at them. That way, everyone knows before they do something like this that they won't be playing for a looooong time once it's proven.

 

Which makes sense in every important respect except the all-important Court of Public Opinion.

 

The problem is that you have people who "look guilty" and people want to penalize them ASAP - the classic "rush to judgement". And you have a league that doesn't want protestors outside (or inside) their stadiums or want to be all over television relying solely upon the (founding principle of our democracy) "innocent until proven guilty" defense.

 

I do think there is an important difference in the Voynov case that he was actually charged with a crime as opposed to "accused" or in a civil suit. The charging does add an important element and wouldn't necessarily be in play with the "I want to make PLAYER X not be available for his first round series against my team" scenario. Still, the player is "innocent until proven guilty" which really adds a level of complexity.

 

WRT Ribiero, I won't get into the nitty gritty of the accusations or the accuser as we have no real way of "knowing" motivations or "what actually happened" but the player has "history" that is in play here (and in a civil suit, but not a criminal matter). I'm not so sure that the league should take interest at this point as much as a team might decide "this guy's not for us."

[ScottM]

Which makes sense in every important respect except the all-important Court of Public Opinion.

 

The problem is that you have people who "look guilty" and people want to penalize them ASAP - the classic "rush to judgement". And you have a league that doesn't want protestors outside (or inside) their stadiums or want to be all over television relying solely upon the (founding principle of our democracy) "innocent until proven guilty" defense.

 

I do think there is an important difference in the Voynov case that he was actually charged with a crime as opposed to "accused" or in a civil suit. The charging does add an important element and wouldn't necessarily be in play with the "I want to make PLAYER X not be available for his first round series against my team" scenario. Still, the player is "innocent until proven guilty" which really adds a level of complexity.

 

WRT Ribiero, I won't get into the nitty gritty of the accusations or the accuser as we have no real way of "knowing" motivations or "what actually happened" but the player has "history" that is in play here (and in a civil suit, but not a criminal matter). I'm not so sure that the league should take interest at this point as much as a team might decide "this guy's not for us."

 

If the league is proactive enough to actually draft an official policy, which is something none of the leagues have done to this point, that would probably come off very well with public opinion. At least they would give the appearance of having some concern about the issue. If it's known that there will be severe punishment, that will help, at least at first. Later on, that might wear off, but it is at least the responsible thing to do. Once people see it actually happen to a guy or two, that will probably help too.

 

I think you're right on Ribiero. I don't really think I'd want to have that cloud hanging over my team if I were a GM, so I'd rather part ways. If the Preds are so minded, the timing couldn't be better, since they can just decide not to resign him.

 

I'm changing subjects a bit, but I wonder how this will affect his value on the free agent market. I wonder how many teams might shy away from him based on this.

[yave1964]

@ScottM

 

1) The Predators desperately need Mike "Kardashian' Ribiero, their centers are far and away the weak link on the team. Without him playing to the level that he did last year they are not a playoff team. And nobody in the organization is a real prospect to take his place. So Poile and the boys will say, 'we will let it play out in court and go from there,' which translates to we need him and we pray the league will not suspend him for jacking it while fondling the eighteen year old  baby sitter.

 

 As for his contract, he wore out his welcome in half the cities in the game already, this probably closes a few more doors. He signed a lowball deal with the Preds last year to prove himself in the league again and played well, another lowball deal is likely on the way. He will sign for less than his talent should make him but more than the lowlife deserves.

 

 Think about it. What would happen to any of us if we fondled the 18 year old baby sitter while pleasuring ourselves? And what would our wife do? He gets off easy because of who he is, a civil case and his 'loving wife' threatening the girl and standing by her man. I wouldn't have the guts to go to sleep in the same room with my wife after fondling the baby sitter, I would be afraid of what would be missing when I woke up the next day. But Ribiero has a wife who backs him up and harasses the girl.

Whatever team he plays for i will dislike. The Wings are talking of going after a second line center to take the pressure off of Zetterberg by shifting him to the Wing. I pray to God that Ribiero stays in Nashville and that Holland doesn't sign him. It would be awful not enjoying Wings games.

[ScottM]

@yave1964 That's a valid point, but let me pose this question: what does this do to the locker room and to team chemistry? I don't really expect Nashville to have another season like the one they just had anyway. If this drags out and becomes a distraction, are they any better with him?

[yave1964]

@ScottM

 

Team chemistry is hige in sport, especially Hockey. If the stars, say Weber and Rinne shun the guy a rift could occur. It could be used as an excuse too, as in, Josi slipped, Fisher got hurt, Forsberg had a sophomore slump, it must have been because of Ribiero. Personally I wouldn't want him on my team just because of things like that.

[radoran]

So Poile and the boys will say, 'we will let it play out in court and go from there,' which translates to we need him and we pray the league will not suspend him for jacking it while fondling the eighteen year old baby sitter.

 

Well, indeed they "will" because they already "have"

 

"Mike has indicated that the charge is without merit and is prepared to vigorously defend himself," the statement said. "We will allow the legal process to move forward without further comment."

 

So, what happens - and I'm just spitballing here - if he wins the civil case?

 

What happens - and, again - spitballing - if someone accuses {fill in name of player here} of the same thing next March?

 

Is the "accusation" all you need in this situation?

 

I, personally, don't give a rat's ass if Mike Ribiero ever plays another second of professional hockey, I wouldn't sign the guy and don't want him on my team.

 

It seems pretty clear that he's had significant problems in his personal life whether it be in Dallas, Washington, Montreal or Phoenix. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the accusations were true - Ribiero himself says he has had serious problems:

 

On his own, Ribeiro spiraled out of control. “I would come home and be alone in the house,” he said. “I started drinking during the day. I would smoke cigarettes. I would smoke other drugs. I had nothing else to do.”

 

Just for the record - THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER THINGS YOU CAN DO. Read a book. Take a walk. Get a hobby. The whole "all I could do is take mind-altering substances" approach really isn't the only option.

 

But if all we need to suspend people from the league is the uncorroborated word of an 18-year-old, we're in some pretty dangerous territory that I'm not sure we're going to enjoy...

[ScottM]

When you get down to it, this whole thing is pretty sad, imo. I think it's easy to assume guilt in Ribeiro's case because of his past and his own admissions. At the same time, it's easy to assume the babysitter is just looking for a quick buck because she's taking the route of a civil case only and not trying to file criminal charges. From all appearances, it's going to be a he said, she said kind of situation. It will probably be hard to get to the real truth, and someone who's innocent of the assumption about them that I listed above is going to be dragged through the mud. If it's Ribeiro, it would be hard to have any sympathy for the guy since he's a dirtbag, but there's a world of difference in the way people perceive someone guilty of substance abuse compared to someone guilty of of sexual assault, even if the "crime" is only in the minds of the public. If it's the babysitter, she not only ends up being violated in the assault, but in the court of public opinion as well. More likely, both will be dragged through the mud and we still won't know the truth beyond the shadow of a doubt when it's over.

[yave1964]

@radoran

 

Voynov was suspended for the year for a crime that he has yet to be convicted of and quite frankly he didn't do anything more than what Ribiero did. Ribiero more or less admitted to the validity of the claim, at least according to statements. "Sorry, my bad, I was drunk" does not excuse that type of reprehensible behavior. What if it was your daughter? If it was mine there would be no end of Hell to pay.

 So she pursues it in civil court, my question is why on Earth it hasn't been pursued for prosecution.

 

 For what it is worth, I agree with your basic point, I do not even think that Voynov deserved suspension pending the situation playing out in court. But using the 'if one why not the other' scenario here, I just don't see why Voynov should have been suspended but if he was, why not Ribiero?

[radoran]

I just don't see why Voynov should have been suspended but if he was, why not Ribiero?

 

Voynov was charged criminally. That's really the only difference. A third party - a District Attorney - examined the evidence and decided there was a preponderance of the evidence to take the case to trial.

 

Much different than "so-and-so filed a civil complaint" - which practically anyone can do at any time.

 

What if it was your daughter? If it was mine there would be no end of Hell to pay.

 

Well, my daughter who is "uncomfortable" with the Ribieros wouldn't be accompanying them to Washington, DC from Dallas in the first place.

 

Even writing that sucks because it reeks of the "blame the victim" mentality. That's not at all what I'm trying to do, but you can be damn sure that Ribiero's attorney will do just that - and worse.

 

So she pursues it in civil court, my question is why on Earth it hasn't been pursued for prosecution.

 

Because - as it stands now given what we know from the complaint itself - it is a classic "he said/she said" situation with no physical evidence which a District Attorney is going to have a devil of a time proving "beyond a reasonable doubt."

 

Ribiero more or less admitted to the validity of the claim, at least according to statements. "Sorry, my bad, I was drunk" does not excuse that type of reprehensible behavior.

 

By the accounts I've seen, he rejects the claim and maintains his innocence in this circumstance. He clearly admits he has had a drinking problem and clearly has lost jobs because of it. The civil complaint "quotes" Ribiero essentially saying "I was drunk" but he hasn't owned up to that.

 

To be clear, I'm in no way excusing anything in this case. I'm concerned with precedent and whether or not the uncorroborated word of an 18-year-old in a civil suit should be enough to qualify a player for automatic suspension.

 

For the record, I don't believe that should be the case.

[yave1964]

@radoran

 

I agree with you. And I think the same should have applied with Voynov last year, my God he missed an entire year, under the old rules his salary counted against the cap and the Kings missed the playoffs by a point.

 Now he tore his Achiles working out and the Kings suspended him and because the injury occurred outside of hockey his salary no longer counts against the cap. His trial (finally!!) is in July.

 If found guilty, hell, deport him and send him back to play in the KHL. But to suspend him for 76 games, based off of an accusation is ridiculous. I am fine with letting the legal system run its course.

 Now Ribiero, if he settles or loses in the Civil court should face a suspension. I wouldn't want the POS on my team, he may be the last piece that the Wings need to complete the puzzle and at this point will go cheap, but I would rather look elsewhere. Anywhere else.

 Like you said sooner or later someone is going to get suspended in a rush to judgment and get found not guilty and sue Bettman's ass off. Now this case, the case with Ribiero, it is believable, I understand the girl is 18 but based off past performance of both Ribiero and his wife, I don't know anyone who could think that it is not at least possible.

 I don't believe the league should have suspended Voynov prior to a court date. I don't believe the league should suspend Ribiero prior to a court date. I understand the difference between prosecution and a civil case.

 But to me, if one deserves it, pending litigation, both do.

[J0e Th0rnton]

@radoran

 

Voynov was suspended for the year for a crime that he has yet to be convicted of and quite frankly he didn't do anything more than what Ribiero did. Ribiero more or less admitted to the validity of the claim, at least according to statements. "Sorry, my bad, I was drunk" does not excuse that type of reprehensible behavior. What if it was your daughter? If it was mine there would be no end of Hell to pay.

 So she pursues it in civil court, my question is why on Earth it hasn't been pursued for prosecution.

 

 For what it is worth, I agree with your basic point, I do not even think that Voynov deserved suspension pending the situation playing out in court. But using the 'if one why not the other' scenario here, I just don't see why Voynov should have been suspended but if he was, why not Ribiero?

Voynov's case went straight to criminal law instead of Civil because the woman went straight to get help, filed a statement immediately and had bleeding cuts and bruises on her face and body and choke marks on her neck.

 

This Ribeiro case is a former employee coming out of nowhere years after the alleged incident and making an allegation with no evidence we know of. The law said flat out said they lack evidence to make a criminal case out of it.

 

Where did Ribeiro claim "Sorry I was drunk?". Ribeiro at one point commented that he had some partying problems, but vigorously denies this sexual assault claim, saying he did a lot of stupid things, but this is not one of them.

 

For the record, I hate Ribeiro. But are you suggesting they suspend anyone the moment an unproven allegation goes to civil court? Players would get blackmailed left right and center to settle or face suspension.

 

So if Nick Lidstrom in his heyday had a random former employee come out and say he molested her, suspend him until it is resolved?

 

No, doesn't work like that.

[yave1964]

@J0e Th0rnton

 

Actually Joe, I said that Voynov should not have been suspended until the legal system ran its course. I also said that if one than both, if one gets a pass, both should.

 

Yeah, Ribiero has denied these allegations but admits that he has been a tool drug and alcohol wise over the years. With the history of he and his wife it is hard to give him a break.

 I have no more inside information than you or anyone else, I understand the difference between civil and criminal court, part of my feelings on the subject boil down to my overall distaste for everything Ribiero. I admit a certain prejudice and based off his and his wife's past stupidities I am prepared to think the worst which obviously prejudices me in my feelings. I just detest him. He has as much pure passing skill as nearly anyone in the game and has pissed away a large portion of his career. He has top ten scorer in the league written all over him. His own worst enemy has been himself. And yes, I admit to a certain amount of 'guilty until proven innocent' with him. I simply dislike him that much so I am not one to be considered impartial. In this case I simply have lost any and all ability to remain unbiased. It is not like he has went out and ran my dog over and kept driving (though if he was in town and my dog got ran over he might be my first suspect) I just get tired of him sullying the sport. He and his dog, I mean his wife, simply need to dry up and blow away.

[jammer2]

and Fisher is really just a very good number three playing his heart out as a number two,

 

 Really, I see him as a legit #2 center who can easily slide into a #1 position if needed. Mike just signed a 2 year 8mill plus contract. I don't think the relitively cheap Preds would have dolled out that kinda cash for somebody they think is a #3 type of center. I had Mike in fantasy hockey last year, he was money.....and the guy has to average over 8+ face off wins a night....sometimes he hits into the high teens depending on who he is going against.

 

 In just 59 games last year, Mike chipped in a very respectable 39 pt effort....that works out to 0.66 pts per game, which is 54 pts in a full 82 game campaign. Not staggering stats by any means, but he plays such a nice 200 foot game, he would be hard to keep him off the ice. Just a real rock solid team first kinda guy who is easy to root for.