Cristiano Ronaldo Rape Case in 2009
Cristiano Ronaldo is apparently attempting to prevent the release of witness testimony in his 2009 Las Vegas rape case, believing that it may result in harassment of individuals involved.
Ronaldo has categorically denied rapping Kathryn Mayorga on June 12, 2009 at the Palms Hotel and Casino.
In a civil dispute, the 37-year-old player first agreed to pay £276,000 ($373,000) to his accuser.
She is now suing for an additional £56 million ($75 million) in damages.
The legal team for the Portuguese footballer is attempting to keep files containing information regarding his 2009 rape case in Las Vegas from being released.
The materials in question include medical records, CCTV footage, emails, recorded interviews, and witness statements.
Ronaldo’s attorneys have filed two separate answers in an attempt to prevent the release of police papers relevant to the rape case.
Most of the information in the files, according to his lawyers, was obtained unlawfully by the Football Leaks website.
However, according to The Sun, Ronaldo’s legal team now demands that the papers not be disseminated, citing the risk to Ronaldo, Mayorga, and other witnesses who submitted evidence.
Cristiano Ronaldo Rape Case
In the submissions filed on Feb. 8 from his lawyers said, “The persons named in LVMPD’s file, as well as those who provided information contained therein, have a strong interest in ‘not being associated unwarrantedly with alleged criminal activity’.”
“Plaintiff, Defendant, and the witnesses who were interviewed as part of the reopened investigation all have non-trivial privacy interests.”
Ronaldo’s team also pointed out how he is a “famous athlete” who attracts “substantial media attention,” which the lawyers say in turn creates a “significant risk of harassment” to witnesses if the files are made available to the public.
“Disclosure of any portion of LVMPD’s file would certainly infringe upon those privacy interests and result in undeserved embarrassment and potentially serious reputational harm.”
Their submission added, “Disclosure of the witness statements even in redacted form coupled with the number of various news articles and media reports concerning this matter creates a significant risk that those witness’ identities will be revealed. A balancing of the privacy interests at issue against the public interest in disclosure strongly militates against disclosure.”