RealGM

In a complaint that reads like the rape allegations made several years ago against NBA star Kobe Bryant, Harrah's employee Andrea McNulty alleges sexual assault against Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger in a lawsuit filed last week in Washoe County, Nevada.

But lawyer David Cornwell strongly denied the allegations Monday night, in a statement released to PFT. "Ben has never sexually assaulted anyone; especially Andrea McNulty," Cornwell said.

In the civil suit, which Cornwell confirms was served on Roethlisberger over the weekend and a copy of which our own Gregg Rosenthal has obtained, McNulty alleges that Roethlisberger asked her to come to his hotel room to fix the television, and that he thereafter forced her to have sex with him.

Roethlisberger faces one civil count of assault, one civil count of sexual assault and battery, one civil count of false imprisonment, one civil count of false pretenses, one civil count of fraud, and one civil count of intentonal infliction of emtional distress.

Ben has never sexually assaulted anyone; especially Andrea McNulty

trwi7 wrote:Anybody else find this comment from his lawyer a little weird?

Ben has never sexually assaulted anyone; especially Andrea McNulty

I'm not saying he's guilty, but the comment just seems weird. Maybe it's just me. I don't recall any other athlete accused of sexual assault having their lawyer coming out and say my client has never sexually assaulted anyone, especially the accuser.

Complaint gets very specific regarding interaction between McNulty, Roethlisberger
Posted by Mike Florio on July 21, 2009 10:46 AM ET
We've finally obtained a full and complete and reliable copy of the complaint filed against Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger in Nevada.

The complaint contains very specific allegations, which either helps prove that the event actually occurred -- or which demonstrates that the plaintiff, Andrea McNulty, has a very active imagination.

McNulty, who says in the complaint that she has worked at Harrah's since March 2003, alleges that she was assigned to serve a concierge-style function on the Penthouse floor of the hotel during the 2008 American Century Celebrity Golf Championship.

McNulty alleges that, on July 10, she and Roethlisberger had a conversation about fly fishing, and that they talked about the fact that McNulty is an avid fly fisherman. (Though, on the surface, the exchange isn't relevant, the contention -- if true -- shows that there was at least a minor relationship between McNulty and Roethlisberger prior to the incident.)

As to the incident itself, it allegedly occurred on Friday, July 11. McNulty claims that, at approximately 10:00 p.m. local time, Roethlisberger returned to his room with a young woman, who left roughly 20 minutes later.

McNulty says that Roethlisberger walked the woman to the elevator, and that Roethlisberger then stopped to talk to McNulty and other staff, for roughly 20 minutes. (Obviously, it'll be critical to determine who these other staff members are, and what they have to say.)

As he was leaving, Roethlisberger allegedly told McNulty that the sound system on his television wasn't working. She offered to have someone from engineering fix it, but Roethlisberger said he would call her about it later.

Roethlisberger allegedly called her a few minutes later, and he said that the television was still broken. She offered to have someone go to the room and fix it. He allegedly asked her to come and "take a quick look" at it.

McNulty claims that she tried to call a couple of other colleagues to handle the situation, but that she couldn't reach anyone. She alleges that Roethlisberger called again and asked her when she was going to fix the television.

Citing a direction from management to ensure that Roethlisberger had an enjoyable trip, she decided to try to fix it herself.

McNulty claims that, when she arrived at the room, he was wearing a T-shirt and athletic shorts. She adds, for no apparent reason other than to show the clarity of her recollection, that the room was a mess.

Roethlisberger showed her the television that was malfunctioning, located in suite's bedroom. Using the remote, she determined that there was no problem with the television or the sound system.

She claims that, as she tried to leave the room, Roethlisberger blocked her path, and that he "grabbed [her] and started to kiss her."

She claims that she was "shocked and stunned that this previously friendly man, that appeared to be a gentleman in her previous contacts with him was suddenly preventing her from leaving, was assaulting and battering her."

McNulty admits that she didn't try to fight Roethlisberger, citing his size and strength. She claims that she "communicated her objection and lack of consent," and that he nevertheless began "fondling [her] through her dress and between her legs."

She claims that he pushed her onto the bed, and despite her alleged protests he "pulled her underpants off and proceeded to penetrate her."

McNulty claims that she told him, "You don't want to do this." She also claims that she said, "Please don't," and that she told him she was not on any type of birth control.

She claims that he said in response, "Don't worry, I'll pull out," which he ultimately did.

At that point, he allowed her to get off the bed. McNulty claims that she went to the bathroom, and "tried to pull herself together." When she emerged, she claims that Roethlisberger asked, "There are cameras on this room, aren't there?"

She responded by saying, "Yes, there are cameras everywhere."

McNulty alleges that he then seem worried, and that his tone became "stern."

"If anyone asks you, you fixed my television," he allegedly said. "You fixed my television. Now go!"

We'll be posting separately the allegations relating to the coworkers at Harrah's, most of which are based on conduct occurring after the alleged assault.

Again, these are only allegations in a civil complaint. There is, to our knowledge, no criminal complaint or investigation, and Roethlisberger through lawyer David Cornwell has strongly denied the contention.

Still, if the allegations set forth above are true, and if sufficient evidence can be compiled to prove that, then this thing could get very ugly for Roethlisberger.

HMFFL wrote:I have yet to read one article about this because I believe it's all BS. However, I heard on t.v. that the woman is seeking 500k.

rkid wrote:So the fools at BSPN decided to tell their employees not to report this story, while all the other major sites and stations have it as one of their main headlines. They have no shame reporting the smallest accusation against other players, but when it's one of their golden boys they just sweep it under the rug. Just another reason to ignore them.

Still not a peep from ESPN on Ben Roethlisberger's legal troubles—and once again no Blog Buzz on SportsCenter—so as long as Big Ben keeps his mouth shut they're standing behind their decision to not stand behind this story.

Why is that again? Just to be clear, here's a more official statement that ESPN gave to Pro Football Talk:

"At this point, we are not reporting the allegations against Ben Roethlisberger because no criminal complaint has been filed. As far as we know, this is a civil lawsuit that Roethlisberger has yet to address publicly."

The implication is that if there's no criminal action and the athlete himself (or herself) has not publicly commented on it, then ESPN considers it a private matter and not "news." Several readers have already called them on this point, mentioning the Shannon Brown case, the Tony Zendejas case (filed Monday), or the O.J. case, among others. However, in all those instances, ESPN could claim that there was a criminal complaint at least tangentially related to the story. But in all those instances, the story itself was about the civil case. They have also covered many, many purely civil cases like the NFL's current anti-trust fracas, the mess regarding the Dallas Cowboys practice bubble, and—the most glaring of all—the Roberto Alomar "AIDS rumors." It seems pretty clear that they're being selective with their enforcement.

It's also extremely disingenuous to say that Roethlisberger has yet to address the case publicly when an official statement from his lawyer—who is presumably authorized to speak on his behalf—was the very first thing we read about the case. ESPN routinely considers lawyers, agents, and even family members to be valid spokespeople and this is no different.

Athletes, like other celebrities or wealthy individuals, face frivolous lawsuits all the time. So at first glance, a prohibition on covering every complaint that comes down the road would seem reasonable. It doesn't take much, however, for a lawsuit like this to rise above a personal squabble into the realm of real news. Ben Roethlisberger is a national celebrity and a civil lawsuit is a matter of public record. No news organization anywhere would ignore a legitimate story based on the standard ESPN has set for themselves.

Dan Le Batard defended ESPN by saying that it's not being reported by "credible" outlets, which is clearly nonsense. Both of Pittsburgh's major newspapers have covered it. The Associated Press, the wire service that ESPN makes frequent use of, is covering it. Even ABC News, ESPN's parent company, has mentioned it. Roger Goodell, the Commissioner of the damn NFL, has addressed it. If it wasn't a news story before, it is now. There is no journalistic or ethical excuse for ESPN to remain quiet.

So why aren't they covering it? Some have suggested that ESPN is deliberately protecting Roethlisberger to preserve their access—access that could benefit both parties financially. Even if they aren't doing it intentionally, their statement sends a clear signal that as long he personally keeps his mouth shut, this case will never reach the airwaves of the biggest sports network in the world.

Perhaps they know what unleashing the ESPN newshounds would mean—Rachel Nichols doing standups in Lake Tahoe, Ed Werder prowling the streets of Pittsburgh, Chris Mortensen on the phones, Roger Cossack's floating head, Outside The Lines, Sports Reporters, thousands of radio jockeys flooding airwaves—and they aren't prepared to do that yet. It's too bad that not covering a circus just because it's a circus is not an option.

Sooner or later, of course, they won't have any choice. Training camps open soon. What if a reporter asks Ben about it and he says, "No comment." Is that addressing the situation? What if there's a settlement? What if there's no settlement? Would they refuse to cover a civil trial?

ESPN's stance is ultimately untenable and they know it. Caution may have been in order when the story first broke, but we are way past the point when this became newsworthy. They are the only major media outlet not covering it and every minute that goes by where they don't address the issue makes them look increasingly foolish and petty. When they do start reporting on this case, perhaps they can begin by explaining their own silence.

SD2042 wrote:The story alone sounds like complete BS. Probably the reason why ESPN hasn't put the story on as a headline.

ESPN finally recognizes Roethlisberger story

More than two days after PFT broke the story that Ben Roethlisberger was the subject of a civil suit in Nevada, the Worldwide Leader has finally acknowledged the story exists.

Just after 8PM ET Wednesday, ESPN decided to run the latest AP story on the Roethlisberger case. (Although the story isn't too fresh, considering Mr. Florio dissembled it five hours ago.)

The story is placed roughly halfway down the headline stack on ESPN's homepage.

CentralQB5 wrote:Just another typical woman trying to get money from a big named person

CentralQB5 wrote:Just another typical woman trying to get money from a big named person