Hundreds of pages of documents were unsealed Thursday in the now-abandoned criminal investigation into the alleged gang rape of a 17-year-old girl by three former San Diego State University football players at a Halloween party in 2021.
More than a year later, the San Diego County District Attorney’s Office announced it would not file criminal charges against the accused, which included All-American punter and NFL draftee Matt Araiza.
“Prosecutors determined it is clear the evidence does not support the filing of criminal charges and there is no path to a potential criminal conviction," the DA's office said in a statement.
Get San Diego local news, weather forecasts, sports and lifestyle stories to your inbox. Sign up for NBC San Diego newsletters.
NBC 7 and other news organizations joined together to ask the court to unseal the search warrants in the case. The court granted that request earlier this month after the documents could be redacted to protect the accuser's identity and other sensitive information.
The 10 search warrants were all aimed at obtaining information from tech and telecommunication companies including Apple, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Google, T-Mobile and Verizon.
In those documents, one detective named four former SDSU football players as attackers or accomplices. That included Araiza, Nowlin "Pa'a" Ewaliko and Zavier Leonard. NBC 7 is not naming the fourth player but learned he played during the 2022 season. Araiza, Ewaliko and Leonard are also named in a civil lawsuit filed by their accuser.
Araiza was drafted by the Buffalo Bills in 2022 and was later cut by the team after the gang rape accusations came to light.
In the complaint, Araiza is accused of having sex with the then-17-year-old girl outside of the party before bringing her inside, where she was allegedly gang raped. The complaint also states the teen told Araiza she was a high school student.
Araiza filed a response to the complaint, claiming the sexual contact between him and the teenager was consensual. He also said he believed she was 18 years old. The other two former players also denied raping her.
According to the San Diego County District Attorney's Office, sexual assault experts — including DA prosecutors and investigators — analyzed all the evidence in the case, including "over 35 taped witness interviews, the results of a Sexual Assault Response Team (SART) exam, DNA results, and evidence derived from 10 search warrants." The search warrants produced four terabytes of data which included forensic evidence from cell phones and video evidence of the incident itself, the DA's office said.
The warrants contained extensive interviews with the young accuser, her friends, anonymous tipsters and more. The documents refer to the young woman as Jane Doe. Those interviews contain inconsistent accounts of what happened. Several of the individuals, including Doe, admit to consuming large amounts of alcohol and not remembering events clearly. Doe told police she wasn’t able to identify all of her alleged attackers.
The search warrants do not contain any of the information investigators obtained from those tech companies. One of the warrants mentions that information obtained from a previous warrant didn’t reveal any information of evidentiary value.
Police also included information about the sexual assault examination conducted on the female accuser two days after the alleged attack. Detectives say a nurse documented bruises and abrasions on the teen’s body, a laceration on her head and injuries to the inside of her mouth. The search warrants say a doctor determined the examination of her genitals did not produce evidence to confirm or refute her claims. From an internal swab, investigators identified DNA from two other individuals, but say the samples were unsuitable to make comparisons in the case.
The documents also reveal new information about the phone call and text message conversations the young woman had with the four former players. San Diego police detectives coached the young woman through these conversations in an effort to gain evidence they could use.
- Search warrants state that Araiza, Ewaliko, and Leonard all admitted they had some kind of sexual contact with her.
- Police say Ewaliko and Leonard told her she was the one that initiated sex and didn't appear to be drunk.
- The documents show Araiza told her that she performed oral sex on him outside the home, but told her they parted afterward and that he didn’t go inside the house.
- The fourth player, who is not being named, told her he was instructed to lock down the house by other players, but says he didn't know she was inside the home until he saw her emerge crying.
The documents also reveal undercover San Diego police officers surveilled Araiza at least six times in February of 2022. Officers recorded Araiza’s daily routine, which included trips to the grocery store.
Last year, many criticized San Diego State University officials for not alerting students to the investigation, and for not conducting its own investigation for months after receiving complaints from students. Administrators said SDPD instructed the school not to interfere with its investigation. The school also noted the alleged crime took place off campus.
Criminal defense attorney Kerry Armstrong, who represents Araiza, shared this statement with NBC 7 Investigates:
"Reading the affidavits just reinforces my belief that attorney Dan Gilleon misrepresented numerous facts in the drafting of his civil lawsuit against Matt Araiza. Many allegations in the lawsuit are in direction contradiction of what Gilleon’s client actually told the police. Additionally, thank goodness the complaining witness’s friends came forward and told the police the truth about what they saw and heard that night. The friends of the complaining witness refute many of the allegations that have been made in the media by the complaining witness and also in her civil lawsuit. All of this information will help Araiza immensely in his civil lawsuit."
Dan Gilleon, the attorney representing the young woman in the civil lawsuit, shared this statement:
"We didn't object to the warrants being unsealed. The truth favors the victim in this case. What seems to have gone unnoticed about the warrants being issued is this: The Judge who signed the warrants first found there was probable cause that a crime had been committed. The fact the DA didn't file charges changes nothing about the Court's decision. It's important to remember that, unlike the Public Defender, a District Attorney is a politician, who doesn't want to risk tarnishing her record with cases she can't be guaranteed to win. Until our country starts appointing DAs, not electing them, this risk averse mentality will continue in favor of criminals."
Dick A. Semerdjian, a second attorney for Araiza, shared this statement with NBC 7 Investigates:
"We greatly appreciate the thorough investigation by the San Diego Police Department of Jane Doe’s serious allegations. The released warrants again confirm the innocence of Matt Araiza and the fact he should never have been named in this civil lawsuit. Jane Doe’s inconsistent narrative is highlighted by the eyewitnesses and her own friends who accompanied her the night of the party. Matt Araiza did not participate in any sexual assault. He never entered the home with Jane Doe. We again urge Jane Doe to dismiss her unsupported lawsuit against Matt Araiza so both can move on with their lives."
