Skip to content

Police dismiss sexual assault case against Jose Canseco

Jun 7, 2013, 3:07 PM EDT

Jose Canseco

Las Vegas police announced that they will not seek criminal charges against Jose Canseco following a woman’s rape allegation last month.

Canseco caused a stir by tweeting about the allegations on May 22, posting personal information about the accuser and insisting that he could pass a lie detector test.

Canseco now says he passed two lie detector tests and the Associated Press reports that police consider the case closed.

  1. mazblast - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:16 PM

    This doesn’t mean he didn’t do anything, only that the LV police aren’t pressing charges. And posting information about his accuser was very uncool.

    Here’s what I really want to know about Canseco–If he’s really broke, how does he keep living the rich person’s lifestyle?

    • paperlions - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:25 PM

      My opinion on him posting the information depends on if he was falsely accused or not (which we don’t know). If you are going to falsely accuse someone of rape, I have no problem with everyone knowing what a despicable person you are.

      • historiophiliac - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:29 PM

        Given the issues with “proving” such things, I think it should just be a no-no to do that at all. I think he should be punished for that. If he wants to go after her for defamation or something, he can (and good luck with that). I think it’s a lose-lose that you just walk away from, really.

      • paperlions - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:33 PM

        I agree. But as a guy, there is little more offensive than being publicly falsely accused of rape or child molestation. Because no matter what happens with the charges, everyone will still wonder if you did it or not. There is really no recovery of your reputation from such a thing.

      • historiophiliac - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:35 PM

        I understand that, but I don’t think outing your accuser like that rehabilitates your reputation in any way. I would be more inclined to let unprosecuted charges pass than that kind of treatment of your accuser.

      • paperlions - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:40 PM

        I agree. I just mean that I understand the impulse. Someone is trying to publicly ruin you and doing so in such a nefarious way that the stain of accusation will never fully fade. It has to be infuriating.

      • historiophiliac - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:43 PM

        I don’t think it’s any more infuriating than having to deal with questions about your sexual history or what you were wearing as a rape victim. As I say, it’s a lose-lose that I think you just have to walk away from.

        I don’t think Canseco’s reputation was significantly sullied by the accusation. I think less of him for tweeting her info though.

      • paperlions - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:35 PM

        For example, you can guarantee that for the next several years, most stories about Canseco will mention that he was charged with rape….just being charged is a huge stigma, and no one will let it go….perhaps rightfully so, as the stigma should stay for those that are guilty.

        It isn’t much different than being asked to prove you aren’t a witch back in the good old days (with the notable exception of not being burned alive). Good luck getting anyone to believe your innocence.

      • historiophiliac - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:38 PM

        I’m not feeling sorry for anyone on that one. I’m not gonna bother to argue it.

      • beebopthearcher - Jun 7, 2013 at 6:45 PM

        If you are going to falsely accuse someone of rape, I have no problem with everyone knowing what a despicable person you are

        Ehhhhhhhh….no, for a few reasons.
        1. There are cases where a dude totally did rape somebody but believes he didn’t because “her eyes were saying yes” and that bullshit.
        2. Let the law take care of this shit. The only thing it makes you look like is a complete and utter scumbag.

        But mostly the first one.

      • pbastille - Jun 7, 2013 at 11:09 PM

        Good lord, histro… walk away from a false accusation for rape, if you’re actually innocent? really?

    • duckthefodgers - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:31 PM

      If he really passed two lie detector tests and obviously there is no evidence of a rape or they wouldve charged him, I have no problem with him putting that woman on blast for trying to mess with his life.

      • historiophiliac - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:36 PM

        Lie detector tests mean nothing and not being charged means “lack of evidence to prove,” not “no evidence.”

      • duckthefodgers - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:39 PM

        Lie detector test are not 100 percent but there is a reason why they are used as a law enforcement tool.

      • historiophiliac - Jun 7, 2013 at 4:02 PM

        And a reason why they are not admissible in court. They don’t do anything to establish guilt.

      • duckthefodgers - Jun 7, 2013 at 4:08 PM

        There is no case so its a moot point.

      • tfbuckfutter - Jun 7, 2013 at 5:48 PM

        You can pass a lie detector tests if you don’t know you’re lying.

        And you would be amazed at how many people don’t know what actually constitutes a rape.

        A good many states don’t even prosecute rape-by-intoxication even though it is on the books.

      • duckthefodgers - Jun 7, 2013 at 6:28 PM

        The point I was trying to make is not that lie detectors dont have their faults but that if he did pass a couple of them added with the fact that the accuser lacks any or enough evidence to even make a case and has not shown any consciousness of guilt this entire time in my opinion the man can stick up for himself by coming out and making her known publicly. Since people want to talk about court of law, its the prosecutions burden to prove hes guilty 100 percent. He doesnt have to prove hes innocent but hes made an effort to if the lie detector story is true. He is innocent of rape because he hasnt been proven otherwise so thats how I see him.

    • unclemosesgreen - Jun 8, 2013 at 8:20 AM

      I remain shocked at how many people who are otherwise seemingly well-informed and well-adjusted have no problem with Canseco twitter-blasting the young woman. I am insufficiently witless to make some big argument here the day after, but I was too angry to weigh in yesterday.

      Sexual assault has a huge gray area that is highly contextual in nature – also highly dependent on what spot the incident happens on – local culture plays into it – and there is a lot of room for debate as to what constitutes assault versus basic uncouth and uncool behavior.

      To publically name this young woman was the act of a boor, plain and simple. One may emphathize with Canseco’s self-righteous outrage if he truly felt falsely accused without taking the canyon-sized leap into the slut-shaming of a non-public figure who may herself have been legitmately aggrieved.

  2. bleedgreen - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:52 PM

    Lie detector doesn’t prove he’s not lying, just that he believes everything he’s saying. The line between consensual and not is very blurred sometimes.

    • beebopthearcher - Jun 7, 2013 at 6:48 PM

      Lie detectors are astoundingly unreliable and shouldn’t be taken seriously. A lot of it depends on who is *reading* the polygraph “results”.

      According to the National Academy of Sciences: ” The NAS found that the majority of polygraph research was “unreliable, unscientific and biased”, concluding that 57 of the approximately 80 research studies that the APA relies on to come to their conclusions were significantly flawed. “

  3. largebill - Jun 7, 2013 at 3:57 PM

    None of us were there and none of us know if he did X, Y, or Z. Also, we have idea about the accuser. She could be a complete innocent who was sexually assaulted or on the other extreme she could be an opportunist who met someone famous and thought that he’d be a soft target for a shakedown. The object lesson for other athletes (which most will ignore) is to be careful about putting yourself in a compromising situation – all celebrities are targets to some degree. Similarly, lesson for all women is to be careful about your safety especially around men you don’t know very well. Sure, you can not prevent all bad things from happening, but a little common sense can reduce the chance of bad things involving you.

  4. senioreditor2 - Jun 7, 2013 at 4:03 PM

    I’m of the opinion that if you’re going to accuse someone of a crime, especially one that could lead to significant prison time, than your privacy is no more important than the accused. I know that it might discourage some from bringing facts forward but one’s freedom is far more important than one’s privacy. Just my opinion.

  5. sportsdrenched - Jun 7, 2013 at 4:28 PM

    The one jury I’ve sat on was a rape case. Talk about getting down in the gutter of what humans are capable of doing to each other. While I can’t say false accusation of rape is just as bad as rape itself. I think there should be some type of deterant for false accusations. The problem is, if you take that too far you discourage rape victims to come forward.

    Just understand, that if someone throws out the R word, to not jump to conclusions about what happened.

  6. jlovenotjlo - Jun 7, 2013 at 4:42 PM

    Hey, remember when a bunch of you jumped all over Canseco for being a “scumbag rapist” when these charges were mentioned on here? How horrible it was that he tweeted the information of the woman he raped?

    Embarrassing. I don’t blame him for being upset enough to tweet her information. Being falsely accused of rape must be a nightmare.

    • sabatimus - Jun 7, 2013 at 5:29 PM

      I still think he did it.

      • jlovenotjlo - Jun 7, 2013 at 5:57 PM

        Because you and him go way back, right? You don’t just know him from media reports and book about steroids to draw this conclusion, I would have to assume.

        Maybe we should just throw out our judicial system and have you decide on everything based on how you feel.

    • tfbuckfutter - Jun 7, 2013 at 5:49 PM


      Just because charges aren’t being filed doesn’t mean he’s not a rapist….

      And the scumbag part is still pretty solid footing.

      • sportsdrenched - Jun 7, 2013 at 5:57 PM

        He may be a scumbag…but being a scumbag isn’t against the law.

      • tfbuckfutter - Jun 7, 2013 at 6:07 PM

        Who said it was?

  7. randygnyc - Jun 7, 2013 at 5:32 PM

    I have no problem with Canseco’s tweets. The police didn’t find actionable evidence. Law enforcement and prosecutors have enough confidence in these lie detector results to drop the case. Falsely accusing someone should have significant consequences. At the very least, your name should be public if your an adult. Jose should sue her for malicious prosecution.

  8. romoscollarbone - Jun 7, 2013 at 5:52 PM

    If they decided there’s not enough evidence convict, it doesn’t mean he’s free and clear. The accuser could pursue a civil suit.

    Although he said it from jump street that he was innocent and did put her info out there, so I’m leaning towards, consensual and she saw an opportunity to pounce.

  9. mazblast - Jun 7, 2013 at 6:49 PM

    Although he would have been better off saying/tweeting nothing, we all know that’s not Jose. There would have been nothing wrong with him tweeting, “There are allegations against me, and the police are investigating. That’s all I’m going to say for now.”

  10. dondada10 - Jun 7, 2013 at 7:18 PM

    Is that a picture of Sylvester Stallone playing Canseco?

    • badintent - Jun 7, 2013 at 11:49 PM

      very ,very observant of you. It’s Sly’s stunt double or it ‘s his twin brother Ozzie as a fake substitute for him . LOL

  11. blabidibla - Jun 8, 2013 at 12:02 PM

    Lots of people assuming guilt in here. Conseco, dick or not, has every right to the assumption of innocence until PROVEN guilty the courts in this country this country are founded.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Wright (2951)
  2. J. Fernandez (2328)
  3. Y. Cespedes (2310)
  4. G. Stanton (2147)
  5. D. Span (1945)
  1. M. Teixeira (1907)
  2. Y. Puig (1907)
  3. G. Springer (1860)
  4. H. Olivera (1839)
  5. F. Rodney (1813)