So, if Vegas runs things similarly to your jurisdiction, they’d still have the evidence kit from Ms. Mayorga’s alleged assault. And be able to test it to see if Ronaldo’s DNA was present in accordance with her allegations. Doesn’t get past the “without her consent” part yet, but it might corroborate her allegation that there was whatever sexual contact she claimed occurred. I wonder if the questionnaire in the electronic document that was mentioned in Blank Slate’s quote was something like an attached .pdf to the email? (With Ronaldo’s notarized signature, as long as we’re dreaming. Still can’t understand how an email like that made it out into public.)
I’d think the SoL for any tort claims filed by Ms. Mayorga would have already lasped, if this chart about Nevada tort law from lawyers.com is correct. Nevada Civil Statutes of Limitations | Lawyers.com Looks like most of the applicable causes of action would be two to three years.
I’d think Ronaldo’s lawyers would be able to file against her on her breach of contract (the NDA), if they felt like making this more of a circus than it already is. And if they felt like subjecting their client to being deposed.
Legal question: Does the victim generally have to repay the financial settlement (in this case, $375,000) if they decide later on that they’d rather take their attacker to court or to the press after all?
That would depend on the terms of the contract… but as I understand it, contracts for illegal activity are automatically void. If you have someone sign an NDA for something that’s embarrassing but legal, that’s fine, but if they sign an NDA for rape or another crime, and then violate the agreement, you have no recourse.
But let’s say in this case that Ronaldo wanted the parentage of the child to be a secret to avoid hurting his public image, and wanted his romantic involvement with her to be kept quiet and that was in the NDA. I find such a thing reprehensible (personally) but there’s nothing illegal in that request.
She then accuses him of rape, but in order to make that charge she has to reveal that she did have sex with him (whether or not the act or method was always willing). That breaks the NDA. That gets a bit murky… I can see on the one hand it would be insane to force a victim of sexual violence to keep her trap shut because of what’s in a contract. That would be horrible.
But can a false (or unprovable) accusation become a license to break an NDA without consequences? If so, what value does such an NDA have? If there are potential consequences, what are they?
I don’t know Nevada rules but I would guess they would have it. It’s just hard to tell what kind of real evidence there is when all of the information is coming from her lawyers. There could be a lot, there could be too little beyond her statements.
I’m guessing here, but: If there really was a rape, then she’s allowed to make that accusation without breaking the NDA, because in that case, legally speaking, there is no NDA. If she makes the accusation, there’s a trial, and he’s found guilty of rape, then that’s the end of the story.
If there’s not such a trial, or there is but he’s found non-guilty, then he could sue her for breach of contract. But that’s risky, because her defense would be that it really was rape and that the contract was thus void. And this would be a civil trial, which would mean that the burden of proof would merely be the preponderance of the evidence. So if there were that level of evidence, then he could very easily end up with a court determining that he did rape her: He wouldn’t go to jail for it, but that’d still be a definite career-ender and reputation-killer. And there probably is that level of evidence, because her side of the he-said-she-said is backed up by the fact that she filed a police report: Can he provide any evidence at all to back up his side?
It would be judged according to ordinary rules of contract law. So if there is a breach of enforcable terms; then yes.
At this point if she really is the mother of his child, then you’d think he’d want to reveal that ASAP, a that would be a good defence to the claim as it would give them a line of attack (“she is pissed I took the kid”)
ETA: It might be a reputation ender, but he is already in the twolight of his career. He has bascially done it all.
Can we stop with this “mother of his child” stuff? This woman had no previous relationship with Ronaldo. She met him for the first time the night of the alleged attack.
According to her lawyer, the NDA can be ruled invalid if it’s found that the agreement was only made by taking advantage of her diminished psychological state. He believes he has the documents to prove it.
Yeah that was confusing me too. There is no mention of a previous or post incident relationship. Did speculation about the child come from a different source? I suppose it’s possible that her lawyers left that out but it certainly doesn’t read that way. Granted my only exposure to this story are the articles in the OP.
I read today that both EA Sports (who has Ronaldo as the face of their FIFA games) and Nike are “concerned” which I think is code for “those sponsorship deals are in jeopardy”.