Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Report: Matt Patricia indicted but not tried for sexual assault in 1996

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/s...ault-case-included-medical-evidence/34794729/
Patricia case included medical evidence, witnesses.
Detnews

https://www.prideofdetroit.com/2018...ricia-sexual-assault-allegations-detroit-news
Clearing up misconceptions about the Matt Patricia allegations.
A look at what we definitively know about the Matt Patricia situation.
POD

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/05/10/matt-patricia-detroit-lions-sexual-assault-indictment
Analyzing the Legal Fallout of Matt Patricia’s Sexual Assault Indictment.
MMQBSI
 
Last edited:
That's what I meant. They don't go beyond what they can see. I'm not sure about one thing so if you were indicted but not tried or convicted does it show up when doing a criminal search? Is it in the database?

If the case is sealed, which we now know this one was, it will not show up in a search database for court records, which is what is commonly used. You can run a standard background check on me today and nothing shows up.

If you run a high level background check, the type law enforcement uses, it shows an arrest, but doesn't say what it is for. It only shows "Dismissal".
 
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/s...ault-case-included-medical-evidence/34794729/
Patricia case included medical evidence, witnesses.
Detnews

https://www.prideofdetroit.com/2018...ricia-sexual-assault-allegations-detroit-news
Clearing up misconceptions about the Matt Patricia allegations.
A look at what we definitively know about the Matt Patricia situation.
POD

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/05/10/matt-patricia-detroit-lions-sexual-assault-indictment
Analyzing the Legal Fallout of Matt Patricia?s Sexual Assault Indictment.
MMQBSI

In the first link, it points out they were going to call a doctor and nurse to the stand, and that medical records were requested by Patricia's attorney.

Believe it or not, that is actually VERY telling.

You see, if the medical records showed a sexual assault or sexual contact, the attorney wouldn't have to request them. They would be a required part of the case discovery file. Prosecutors would not be allowed to admit them without turning a copy over to the defense team.

When I was accused, they ran a full medical exam on the girl. It showed ZERO signs of any sexual activity. No rape. No sex. No nothing.

And my lawyer also had to request those records. The prosecution was prepared to put a nurse and a doctor on the stand and ask them questions, but was not going to admit the medical records, so my lawyer had to subpoena them to be able to introduce it ourselves.

A lawyer can twist up words and make a whole lot of nothing sound like something. You put the nurse on the stand, and it's an immediate appearance of "they are here for a reason" so a jury is already expecting to hear critical medical testimony, and then you ask questions about the accusers mental state, and her emotional state, ability to recall details, etc...

In the jury's mind, it reinforces their assumption the nurse is there to be an expert medical witness, while in reality, you never even ask her about the results of a medical kit.

One thing is absolutely certain from that article... the medical findings were negative. If they were positive, the prosecution would have admitted them. If they were "inconclusive" they would have introduced them and prayed on the jury's natural assumptions.

The fact the defense team had to petition the court for them, says they were absolutely negative.
 
By the way, ands I suggest Googling this to see it for yourselves, doctors claim these kits can reveal an assault with 100% accuracy, but they cannot be used to discount the possibility of an assault.

In other words, if it shows an assault, an assault happened, 100% of the time. But they also say if it reveals no assault, it doesn't mean an assault didn't happen.

The doctor and nurse were more than likely being called to testify to that fact, since they knew the defense team was going to argue the rape kit was negative.
 
The Lions have also staffed coaches that have drove through fast food drive thrus naked and drunk. Another one that got drunk and climbed through a girls bedroom, took off his clothes and laid in bed with her. They don't have a good track record of this.
 
In the first link, it points out they were going to call a doctor and nurse to the stand, and that medical records were requested by Patricia's attorney.

Believe it or not, that is actually VERY telling.

You see, if the medical records showed a sexual assault or sexual contact, the attorney wouldn't have to request them. They would be a required part of the case discovery file. Prosecutors would not be allowed to admit them without turning a copy over to the defense team.

When I was accused, they ran a full medical exam on the girl. It showed ZERO signs of any sexual activity. No rape. No sex. No nothing.

And my lawyer also had to request those records. The prosecution was prepared to put a nurse and a doctor on the stand and ask them questions, but was not going to admit the medical records, so my lawyer had to subpoena them to be able to introduce it ourselves.

A lawyer can twist up words and make a whole lot of nothing sound like something. You put the nurse on the stand, and it's an immediate appearance of "they are here for a reason" so a jury is already expecting to hear critical medical testimony, and then you ask questions about the accusers mental state, and her emotional state, ability to recall details, etc...

In the jury's mind, it reinforces their assumption the nurse is there to be an expert medical witness, while in reality, you never even ask her about the results of a medical kit.

One thing is absolutely certain from that article... the medical findings were negative. If they were positive, the prosecution would have admitted them. If they were "inconclusive" they would have introduced them and prayed on the jury's natural assumptions.

The fact the defense team had to petition the court for them, says they were absolutely negative.

There could be many ways a girl could get sexually assaulted and nothing would come up on a medical exam.
 
Absolutely true, which is why her interview dictates where the investigation goes.

If a girl claims to have been raped orally, they don't do a vaginal rape kit, for that exact reason.

And absolutely the kit can show nothing even after an assault. All I am saying is the kit definitely came back negative if the defense had to petition the courts for it.
 
South padre island...its 90% likely he had sex with the girl. Whether it was consensual... who knows it was 20 years ago. And at this point... who cares.
 
Detroit Lions team president Rod Wood said Saturday that his team followed the law when it came to how it approached the hiring process for first-year head coach Matt Patricia earlier this year, even if that meant not uncovering a 22-year-old aggravated sexual assault indictment that has since come to light.

"We always err on the side of hiring a firm who understands all the laws, follows them, state and federal," Wood told ESPN on Saturday. "So that we don't happen upon something that we're not entitled to have nor would we would be able to use."

In this case, it meant following both federal law and the state laws of Massachusetts and Michigan. The Fair Credit Reporting Act does not allow felony arrests that did not result in convictions beyond 7 years old to be considered in possible employment so most search firms do not include that information on the background checks they provide to employers -- and that includes the Lions.

Wood declined to say what firm the team used for the background check other than to say "they are a well-regarded, national professional background screening company." He also said he was unaware of APG Security, the firm the Detroit News reported this week had requested the indictment and dismissal forms from the Cameron County prosecutor's office in January. Wood said the Lions had not employed that firm for their background check.

Wood knows there are other ways for information like this to be found -- it is publicly available in Nexis searches and on the Cameron County open records website -- but for employment purposes it could not be considered anyway. And Wood said his franchise wanted to follow the law.

"There might be ways for companies, teams in our case, to find information out about a prospective employee through other means than the legal means," Wood said. "I guess if others wanted to do that, that's their prerogative. I'm only in charge of what the Lions do and I want to do it the right way."

Additionally, because the Lions were following both Massachusetts and Michigan law, they were not allowed to ask Patricia about any felony or misdemeanor arrests that didn't lead to convictions. By Michigan law, they could have asked about felony arrests, although Ann Arbor, Michigan-based employment attorney Nicholas Roumel told ESPN he wouldn't advise companies to ask about arrests that didn't result in convictions

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...d-says-team-followed-law-matt-patricia-hiring
 
http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2018/05/nfl_decides_it_wont_discipline.html#incart_river_index
NFL decides it won't discipline Matt Patricia, Lions over old sexual assault claims.
Mlive

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/...lion-matt-patricia-nfl-1996-arrest/629447002/
NFL won't discipline Matt Patricia, Detroit Lions over 1996 arrest.
Freep

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/s...ce-nfl-discipline-1996-allegations/629559002/
Detroit Lions, Matt Patricia won't face NFL discipline from 1996 allegations.
Detnews

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...ect-discipline-1996-sexual-assault-allegation
Lions, Matt Patricia not subject to discipline over 1996 sexual assault allegation.
espn
 
Last edited:
Back
Top