Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Thursday, April 16, 2009

About Those Allegations Against Fredy Montero

Posted by on Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:11 PM

8d01/1239923355-monteroticket001.jpg

Even though he's not the highest paid Sounders player, or second-highest, or third-highest (or fourth-, or fifth-), Fredy Montero has been the clear star so far: He's 21, he scored the first goal in Sounders FC history, he went on to score a total of three goals in the first two games, he was named Major League Soccer's player of the month for March, his photo was printed on tickets at last Saturday's game (at least on my ticket—above), and he's already endured the celebrity rite of passage of lurid headlines about him in the press. A couple weeks ago, a Bellevue woman accused Montero of raping and stalking her, and after the Sounders' first losing game on Saturday night, a drunk fan in the parking lot was heard shouting, "Fuck, Montero! Stop raping people and start scoring goals!"

As was first reported Tuesday by many news outlets, King Country prosecutors are not filing criminal charges against Montero because the woman's story doesn't hold up. All the reports contained the basic gist about contradictory statements/actions by the accuser (every story has the statements from authorities that basically say: this wasn't rape, this lady's accusations make little sense), but the Seattle Times has the best rundown of all the facts. Here's their story from yesterday—which includes a couple details I haven't found anywhere else, including the one-word reaction from the accuser to the news that prosecutors aren't pursuing charges, and the detail that on the first of the two incidents, when she slept at Montero's place in Factoria after getting too wasted to drive, she'd been offered a ride home and refused it.

Still, the most damning quote from the prosecutors is in the P-I story (and left out of the Times story): "In her own words, (the woman) fails to describe any forced sexual contact. Moreover, when (she) said 'no' the suspect complied with her request."

If you're obsessed with the Sounders (guilty!), and excited about being a guilt-free Montero fan again, read both stories.

 

Comments (16) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Montero needs to learn that footballers are supposed to get in trouble with the law for fighting outside of bars, preferably with BAC levels of .05. Not sexual violence.

I'm glad he's off the hook, and sorry for what appears to be a seriously messed-up woman. I hope she gets some help.
Posted by Fnarf on April 16, 2009 at 4:23 PM
2
How is having sex with someone while she is asleep not rape? If you're woken up by someone's DICK INSIDE YOU, it sounds like rape to me.
Posted by melinda on April 16, 2009 at 4:28 PM
3
it's not like there was a Seattle Weekly article on actual false rape charges.

people have dreams - sometimes scary ones that feel real.

only way this was a real charge was if she went in and got a rape kit done - and even then what we remember is not always what happened, especially if we were drinking.

this is part of why no one-strike-you're-out sentenced-to-jail-for-life law will EVER pass.

famous people have stalkers who imagine themselves doing things with them so strongly that they literally believe them, even when there's iron clad proof it never happened.

that said, I feel sorry for all the people involved. all of them.

it is possible it may have been date rape ... especially when people are from different cultures what appears a strong signal in one is a form of flirting in another ... i remember some women when I was in my 20s took my Canadian mild way of saying no as being yes.
Posted by Will in Seattle on April 16, 2009 at 4:36 PM
4
I bet everyone's going to project their own personal experiences onto this and not view all the possibilities.
Posted by god u r so extreme on April 16, 2009 at 4:37 PM
5
The charges against Montero were not dropped, Dominic - in fact, charges against Montero were never even filed.
Posted by Trey on April 16, 2009 at 4:40 PM
6
What's with all this "the 23 year old woman" crap... at this point, since she tried to run him up on false charges, she should be a named party. If I were him I'd be putting together a defamation of character suite. In this culture a false rape accusation is every bit as damaging to a man as actually being raped is to a woman. What a cunt.
Posted by You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me on April 16, 2009 at 4:47 PM
7
I think naming her is counter-productive. Regardless of what the exact reality is/was.
Posted by Will in Seattle on April 16, 2009 at 4:52 PM
8
The fact that the case was dropped doesn't mean she wasn't raped. It just means there was too much reasonable doubt to win a court case.

Still, if everything that she said was true, including the "contradictory behavior" and the blurry boundaries and insisting on coming to his apartment the second time at 2:00am, then she was raped. Only she and Montero know if she's telling the truth.
Posted by seandr on April 16, 2009 at 4:59 PM
9
P.S. The Weekly has a great article this week on false accusations of rape:
http://www.seattleweekly.com/2009-04-15/…

Posted by seandr on April 16, 2009 at 5:02 PM
10
A couple of things...
@5, absolutely correct. There was an investigation, which was dropped, but charges were never filed, Mr. Frizzelle.
@8 Only if this woman was forced to have unwanted sexual contact was she raped. Her erratic storytelling coupled with the lack of physical evidence points against her and could result in either criminal charges or a lawsuit.
Posted by Krizpie Kreme on April 16, 2009 at 5:41 PM
11
@3: There was a rape kit, and the nurse examiner found "clear evidence' of sexual assault (per the PI article). There was just no bruising on her arms or face.

It seems clear she liked him and wanted to date him, but it also seems clear to me that she was assaulted. She drove from his place to the hospital, immediately afterwards (again, per the PI article).

Rape cases are notoriously difficult to prove, given the lack of witnesses and ambiguity of certain evidence. If I am reading between the lines on this one, this was a girl who liked a guy - enough to overlook some seriously sexually aggressive behavior - but didn't want to have sex with him at the outset. His booty call at 2am suggests he was quite ready to have sex with her.
Posted by karion on April 16, 2009 at 6:01 PM
12
Ack, yes, you're all right re: charges. I corrected the language in a couple places.
Posted by Christopher Frizzelle on April 16, 2009 at 6:12 PM
13
First, I don't think that we should ever print the name of the accuser. I think the media's policy on this is right on. I just don't see why we don't afford the accused the same courtesy. Why doesn't the media wait until someone has been proven guilty of rape before writing a story about it? Accusations can cost athletes their reputations as well as potentially millions of dollars in endorsement deals.

Would it be possible to keep this off the internet in this day and age? Probably not, but I think that responsible news outlets could refrain from reporting it. A couple of nutty websites posted the name of Kobe's accuser, but no media outlets ran with this. Similarly, I think they are capable of holding back until charges are proven.
Posted by Fairness for everyone on April 16, 2009 at 8:14 PM
14
@10: "Only if this woman was forced to have unwanted sexual contact was she raped."

Agreed, and her description of the second encounter clearly fits that description. "Erratic storytelling" and "lack of physical evidence" (neither of which is a fair description of this case) certainly weakens her case against Montero, but it does not prove she was not, in fact, raped that night.

And based on the information in the article, Montero has absolutely no case against her. Without a witness, video, email, or some other smoking gun, he can not prove that she consented to sex. He would be an idiot to press charges against her.

Unless it comes out that she has a psychiatric disorder, I think @11 has it correct.
Posted by seandr on April 16, 2009 at 8:50 PM
15
I'm just curious, with the lack of bruising etc., how does "clear" evidence of sexual assault differ from someone who has just had consensual sex?
Posted by WA on April 17, 2009 at 7:50 AM
16 Comment Pulled (No) Comment Policy

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy