DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Trade for Watson 2

You certainly are guessing. And that's the point.

Some people call taking money in a lawsuit a settlement and not blackmail. Some will say the alleged victims are lying but not question those calling them liars. I wonder how the characters of those accusing the alleged victims stack up against the alleged victims? And I mean of course rich and powerful people would never pay off anyone to lie and undermine their victims.

For as much as people accuse me of believing who I have decided to believe, when the picture becomes clearer they seem to be doing the same thing. They have decided to give validity to those undermining these 22 women.... again.

If there is a "contemporaneous tape recording of a phone conversation," it's tangible evidence. There's no belief involved. It either exists or it doesn't.

And the actual content of that recording that either exists or it doesn't is more critical than its existence.

The spin and believing anyone willing to undermine the victims is out in full force.

Or....some people are willing to wait to see as much evidence as possible before going on a crusade.

I understand you have already renounced your fandom, others would like more time before making a final judgement.

The spin and believing anyone willing to claim assault is also pretty active.

Some of us just want to get to the truth. We're not intent on believing anyone without evidence. The optics and narratives are irrelevant to the truth. What can be verified? A recording is the best evidence I've heard of so far.

If you have a reference to solid evidence of wrongdoing, share it with us.

It's nothing more than conjecture and it's why, likely, nothing ever comes from it. There is no hard evidence, from what I've seen/heard, so it's going to be very difficult to convict.

The Press Conference cannot come soon enough. I need to hear straight from the horse's mouth on this one.

BTW, on the field, Watson is an A+, HR, Franchise QB the likes of which haven't been seen in Cleveland since Otto. I hope he's not Jim Brown off the field.

Let's be clear, The browns don't want to know the WHOLE STORY,,,, Otherwise, they'd have at least talked to the lawyer representing the women as well as the women themselves.., Maybe not all of them, but at least some of them.

If you don't want the whole story, then don't ever look at both sides... And for me, that smells like they just didn't give a damn.

Why do you say that?

I wouldn't expect to hear Watson say much of anything with civil litigation still ongoing. I imagine he will continue to maintain his innocence, say he understands why people have turned on him, but looks forward to truth coming out, reinforce how he's always been an upstanding member of his community and say he looks forward to getting back to football and playing in front of the Dawg Pound.

The Dawg Pound reference is a must for any new player or coach joining the organization!

Well if you are just gonna write it for him...

Why the heck would they talk to the other attorney? They talked to the defense attorney, they read the depositions, they may have spoken to the DA.

They already know what the women and attorney are going to say. I am sure they can read the claims in the court papers.

Agreed. Most people know that it would be ignorant for the team to talk to the other attorney. They would just be opening up themselves to all sorts of problems, including disclosure and putting themselves in a compromising position.

Just so you know the defense does not present evidence to the Grand Jury. The process is not adversarial so Watson was not present and the defense attorney normally wouldnt be either. The Grand Jury made it's decision only on what was the prosecutor said/presented and the one witness testimony.

this is correct.

the function of a Grand Jury is to determine if a criminal case should go forward, based upon the available evidence.

You just answered why the Browns hierarchy didn’t want to know the whole truth around Watson. Maybe his actions can’t be proved in a court of law but they are enough morally disgusting that if the Browns knew about it after their investigation they can’t stand behind such behavior without totally losing the public opinion.

By ignoring listening to these 22 women's personal stories they deflected themselves from future criticism. With finalizing the trade deal before the case is settled and giving the player a monster contract they jumped over the final verdict from these civil law suits and the potential criticism that can come with it. Later they release a vague public statement who gives the impression of them have done a full investigation but in reality the statement told us exactly nothing apart from their wishful thinking. The Browns overall strategy was probably to speed up the thought process of the public opinion by no matter what they knew or not and by going forward with this deal they make the media to talk about this monster deal and it’s consequences instead of the potential questionable character that is surrounding Mr. Watson.

It’s a very smart strategy and it clearly works.

Can you provide evidence that Deshaun Watson is guilty even though he was found innocent in a court of law? Why wasn't this evidence given? Where is it?

I don't know if all these women are being represented by the same lawyer, but if so, that destroys a lot of credibility at least for me. Now, if you had separate women, separate lawyers, all from different areas it would be a little bit easier to believe.

I'm still waiting for evidence that's yet to be provided. Why hasn't it been provided?

No, he was not. Not remotely so.
A grand jury chose to not recommend indictment. Period. That is in no way, shape, or form the same as "found innocent in a court of law". Not even close to being the same thing.

Clearly you didn't read or at least comprehend what else I said in that post...

Let me try again.... if you want to investigate anything, and you want the TRUTH. You must look at both sides....Did they talk to any of those that brought charges against Watson? NO.. Therefore they only got one side of the story. They didn't give a damn about the whole truth otherwise they'd have talked to more than just Watsons side...

Did I help you out there? Do you understand now?

It's a 5 year contract. I think the idea that he remains a Brown for 10-15 years extraordinarily unlikely. Not only is that not the trend in the NFL, Watson's past would seem to indicate he is happy to up and force a move whenever he wants.

Clearly that's the truth... They simply didn't want to know the whole truth so that they could have deniability. And I also agree that it's a great strategy... For those that are Morally bankrupt.

I always thought that the Haslams were shrewd business people.. Can't take a small gas operation and turn it into a titan of the industry without being so.

I didn't think they are Morally bankrupt. And it doesn't matter whose Idea it was... Berry, KS or someone else. The Haslams write the checks so they'd have had to sign off...

I think this is the root of it - they didn't want to know the whole truth because it might lead to a sticky, uncomfortable knowledge. I believe what the Browns did was go through the motions of enough digging to make sure it was unlikely no additional legal issues are going to pop up (that's self preservation and making sure you aren't tipping $230M down the drain) and then they did enough investigating that [1] was one sided enough to guarantee nothing concrete and too unpleasant could be verified [2] they could make a big PR announcement and proclaim to the world that they had done a thorough and deep investigation ... creating the equivalent of plausible deniability if the chit ever did hit the rotating blades that create wind.

It's sort of like selective hearing. From a football and business perspective I don't blame them at all. From a human decency perspective I think it lacks any moral fortitude and circumvents "doing the right thing" that most/many of us would do in our every day lives.

Exactly!

Sounds like you guys have thought this through fully and have it all figured out. Just like when the media took their time to make sure the facts were all in before the Duke rape case was finished. Is this a great country or what?

If you red those exchanges and comments - no one has pronounced Watson guilty or innocent. It's a discussion about how hard Cleveland tried to find the whole truth.

In defense of CLE someone explained that talking to the victims, they might learn something that puts them in a compromising position. Another poster commented that this highlights/answered why the Browns didn't want to know the whole truth. I added my opinion that CLE probably did enough to be sure no other skeletons were going to jump out of the closet - which is smart if you are dropping $250M ... and agreed that they didn't want to learn too much but also wanted to provide the illusion of doing a very deep investigation for PR purposes.

Which part of that do you disagree with?

It is nothing like the Duke story. It's been confirmed Watson met with over 40+ massage therapists. It's been acknowledged he paid for sexual services. What's been claimed by some of the 40 is that he did so without their consent or agreement. Are you announcing that he is innocent? Your reference to Duke seems to suggest that is your belief.

its actually better than being found innocent in a court of law, means we don't see enough here to even merit convening and determining guilt. By overwhelming majority (9 out of 12) This is following up but not response to this part but when you look at the civil charges as well, the basis of claim is he made unwanted sexual advances and forced sexual acts, both of those are criminal felony. So if that is your basis for the civil suits and a criminal court already determined there isn't enough evidence for even probably cause, its going to be a tough row for them. Add in the attempted extortion and Watson's lawyer recommending them go to police, this doesn't look good for them. Now the lawyer has said some dumb things concerning consensual acts which i think will be the grounds of whatever suspension he gets, but as many have pointed out in the media, the NFL usually doesn't suspend for civil matters and will usually wait until everything is wrapped up before meting out punishment. Probably a good chance Watson plays this whole year with the civl cases up in the air

Just because they didn't talk directly to the accusers doesn't mean they didn't acquire access to their recorded depositions or other recordings/evidence. While the fact that the Browns meeting with DeShaun took place in his lawyers office could merely be convenience, there's also the fact that it's privacy was pretty well guaranteed and a lot of evidence (or digital copies of evidence) would have been held at that location.

I don't think paid sexual service has been acknowledged. He paid for massages, and there was also consensual sex. Paying for sex is illegal in Texas. If that had been acknowledged, he would have been charged. I'm not saying that wasn't what happened. However, his admissions don't tie the sex and money together directly.

It's not hard to understand why Browns wouldn't/couldn't gain insightful info from the defense attorney during an active civil suit. Same reason why Watson himself isn't going to say anything insightful right now and during his PC. You're falling for this lawyer's shtick (something he's sorta known for).

I think much of the truth will come out, but patience is required.

That's a fair point from a legal perspective. Regardless of what anyone thinks about the situation - if anyone thinks Watson wasn't paying some of these women for sex, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

That might be true under certain circumstances ... but if sexual assault charges end up with a conviction rate of 0.7% I think it's fair to say there are other factors at play. Purple is 100% - the GJ decision by no means indicates innocence.

"100% - the GJ decision by no means indicates innocence."

But yet many of you act as if it means he was guilty. If the GJ had all the evidence, and heard the testimony, and felt no charges should be levied, why are so many hellbent on claiming he is guilty anyway?

After reading some of those quotes by the 'victims", I am feeling more and more inclined to be believe Watson. I don't know what happened, but if a grand jury can't find a reason to charge someone, I would have to believe that there was nothing to be charged with.

As for the "22 women could not be lying" argument, they may not be lying about everything, but when lawyers convince you that if you join in, you could be looking at getting a lot of money, I could see where many could be convinced to embellish their story.

I also believe that if Watson and his lawyers even remotely think they would lose these civil complaints, they would be trying to settle them out of court.

But, like I said before, I don't know and I'm only speculating. But I refuse to condemn the man until he is found guilty in court, not by emotionally charged public opinion.

You don't understand. They can read the depositions of the claimants. They don't need to go back and talk to them.

For that matter, they might even put themself in the position of witness tampering if they did so. Let's get off this idea that the Haslam's or whoever should have gone and talked to anyone other than Watson or Watson's representatives.

j/c...

It's a convenient distraction. Some would like to compare the word of 1 woman to the word of 22 and pretend it's the same thing.