http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/02/11/2009-02-11_new_girlfriend_says_roberto_alomars_exgi.html

 

His new model girlfriend has issues w/ the ex. Surprised?

 

Also, how was that nice house she lives in paid for?

 

Dall declined to comment at her home in Whitestone, Queens - a $5 million mansion bought by a trust set up by Alomar. The grandiose three-story yellow stucco house has a pool, a marble portico and 12-foot windows.

 

 

Conclusion jumping anyone???

http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2009/02/11/2009-02-11_new_girlfriend_says_roberto_alomars_exgi.html

 

His new model girlfriend has issues w/ the ex. Surprised?

 

Also, how was that nice house she lives in paid for?

Dall declined to comment at her home in Whitestone, Queens - a $5 million mansion bought by a trust set up by Alomar. The grandiose three-story yellow stucco house has a pool, a marble portico and 12-foot windows.

 

 

Conclusion jumping anyone???

 

 

The first article said she owned a spa in Manhattan right? I'm sure that's fairly lucrative

The first article said she owned a spa in Manhattan right? I'm sure that's fairly lucrative

 

The second one says she lives in a house he bought her. That's fairly lucrative too right? And now she wants $15M from him for having consensual sex w/ him and NOT contracting HIV.

I'm in no way condoning his actions, but she doesn't have HIV right? She was w/ him when a doctor told him to get an HIV test right? He claims to have had one earlier in his life that came back negative right? If there was no positive test, and she doesn't have HIV where is attempted murder? Why did she knowingly have unprotected sex w/ someone she believed was HIV positive? They broke up in October and she is suing him in February. Something isn't adding up here to me.

 

It's not possible that he had the test, it came back positive, and he lied to her about it? And if he then had sex with her knowing he had a disease that is always fatal, that would qualify as attempted murder in my book. If he indeed had such a test back then, I would assume there exists medical records of them somewhere. Getting access to them might prove challenging, but there should be proof somewhere of when Alomar first become aware he was HIV positive.

The second one says she lives in a house he bought her. That's fairly lucrative too right? And now she wants $15M from him for having consensual sex w/ him and NOT contracting HIV.

 

Just out of curiosity, if someone tried to shoot you with a gun, but misses and the bullet just whizzes by your head, would you expect that person to be charged with attempted murder even though you sustained no injuries at all?

Interesting that Alomar's response was only that his "health was good" and didn't directly address the issue of whether he had AIDS. I think that it pretty telling right there. If he truly didn't have the disease, I think he would say so loud and clear because the girl's case would immediately have no basis.

It's not possible that he had the test, it came back positive, and he lied to her about it? And if he then had sex with her knowing he had a disease that is always fatal, that would qualify as attempted murder in my book. If he indeed had such a test back then, I would assume there exists medical records of them somewhere. Getting access to them might prove challenging, but there should be proof somewhere of when Alomar first become aware he was HIV positive.

 

I agree w/ that, but just b/c this lady says it's so doesn't mean it is.

Just out of curiosity, if someone tried to shoot you with a gun, but misses and the bullet just whizzes by your head, would you expect that person to be charged with attempted murder even though you sustained no injuries at all?

 

If I was playing russian roulette w/ them and the bullet wasn't in there no. She supposedly thought he may have HIV and continued having unprotected sex. If you run out in front of my car and I miss you should I be charged w/ attempted murder? I think you're looking at it differently than me. She chose to do this, I don't choose to have people shoot at me.

Interesting that Alomar's response was only that his "health was good" and didn't directly address the issue of whether he had AIDS. I think that it pretty telling right there. If he truly didn't have the disease, I think he would say so loud and clear because the girl's case would immediately have no basis.

 

He's been lawyered up here obviously.

He's been lawyered up here obviously.

 

And if I had to guess, the lawyer knows full well that Alomar can't go screaming from the top of the mountain that he doesn't have AIDS if he actually does. If he had tested negative, I can't imagine any lawyer that would tell him that this is the first - and most critical - piece of information to get out in his official response. Otherwise, why bother to make a response at all?

If I was playing russian roulette w/ them and the bullet wasn't in there no. She supposedly thought he may have HIV and continued having unprotected sex. If you run out in front of my car and I miss you should I be charged w/ attempted murder? I think you're looking at it differently than me. She chose to do this, I don't choose to have people shoot at me.

 

The way I read the story is that he repeatedly told her he tested negative and did not have the disease and that she stopped having unprotected sex with him only after learning he did test positive. The basis of her claim is that during the period that Alomar told her he was negative, he already knew he had tested positive (and lied to her about the results).

The way I read the story is that he repeatedly told her he tested negative and did not have the disease and that she stopped having unprotected sex with him only after learning he did test positive. The basis of her claim is that during the period that Alomar told her he was negative, he already knew he had tested positive (and lied to her about the results).

 

She either was at the doctor w/ him or knew the doctor told him to have tests. From that point on she continued having unprotected sex w/ him. I thought her story was that the first time he tested positive she quit, but he should have had a test earlier. Now she's trying to get $15M out of him and she doesn't have the virus. Call me skeptical...

And if I had to guess, the lawyer knows full well that Alomar can't go screaming from the top of the mountain that he doesn't have AIDS if he actually does. If he had tested negative, I can't imagine any lawyer that would tell him that this is the first - and most critical - piece of information to get out in his official response. Otherwise, why bother to make a response at all?

 

Or they're getting a counter suit ready. The official comment was we'll let the truth come out in court, from the lawyer I thought.

She either was at the doctor w/ him or knew the doctor told him to have tests. From that point on she continued having unprotected sex w/ him. I thought her story was that the first time he tested positive she quit, but he should have had a test earlier. Now she's trying to get $15M out of him and she doesn't have the virus. Call me skeptical...

 

From the story:

 

"The doctor told him to have an HIV test and he refused, she says, stating he had been tested and was AIDS-free."

 

You don't think that finding out that you had unprotected sex with someone who has AIDS (assuming he actually does) and doing so because this person, whom you trusted and apparently loved, told you he was AIDS-free, might possibly cause some emotional distress? Whether you have tested negative or not? Now $15 M? I don't know about that amount and I'm not saying she doesn't bear some responsibility herself, but I certainly think I would find it a bit distressing. And if Alomar did knowingly expose her, he's a sick, pathetic excuse for a human being.

Or they're getting a counter suit ready. The official comment was we'll let the truth come out in court, from the lawyer I thought.

 

And the official comment from Alomar was a lame "My health is good." If you're going to make a comment about your health, why not say you are HIV negative? If you're going to wait until court to let the "truth come out", why make any comment at all then?