Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 9 10
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 263
Likes: 26
B
2nd String
Offline
2nd String
B
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 263
Likes: 26
Check this video. Interested to hear the spin from the Deshaun head in the sand crowd. Rooting for this guy is disgusting.


Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
j/c:

Jake Burns is a guy who I really respect in regards to understanding the game. It is amazing how often he sees things on the field the same way I do. I think most know about him on here and most think highly of him. I'm going to post a link to a radio interview he did w/one of the local Cleveland stations. It's not for everyone, but guys who love the intricacies of the game will enjoy it. He addresses what Watson will do, some takes on Baker, and some on Brissett. The cool thing to note is that he is still in the process of evaluating Watson and hasn't even got to Watson's best season, which was the last year he played. I am so looking forward to seeing the video breakdowns that Jake does once he gets through his evaluation process. Anyway, here is the link for those of you who are football junkies.

https://omny.fm/shows/wkrkfm-on-demand/jake-burns-deshaun-can-overcome-bakers-frustrating

Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 263
Likes: 26
B
2nd String
Offline
2nd String
B
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 263
Likes: 26
Really cool, does he also discuss his tactics for preying on young women?

Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,583
Likes: 117
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 5,583
Likes: 117
Originally Posted by Baker_Dawg
Check this video. Interested to hear the spin from the Deshaun head in the sand crowd. Rooting for this guy is disgusting.

I posted her interview on here weeks ago without any interest from the pro Deshonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn folks.

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,452
Likes: 74
1
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
1
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,452
Likes: 74
I don’t think being pro or anti Deshaun is going to matter in a few weeks. My gut feeling is that the tide is turning and he’s going to be out of football for a much longer stretch than we think. The Gumble interview the general uptick in recent negative press, the lack of shock and feeling of righteousness of the Trevor Bauer suspension and the fact that Goodell and the NFL risks much more in going easy on him rather than throwing the kitchen sink at him all adds up to a historic suspension coming. I could easily see a year. You bet if could be 2 years. If for no other reason than the other owners dropping the hammer on the Browns for that horrific contract.

I’m sorry for us, the Browns fans. I don’t know if Haslam drove the trade but I really thought this group, the FO and coaching was smarter than this. Deshaun is absolutely a better QB than baker but that is just not even close to the only consideration when making a trade like this. A healthy Baker may not have been the long term answer but even if he’s 80% a deshaun without all this crap hanging over the team and the off-season I would have taken that. Might it have been enough to get us to the SB? With everything else this teams has? I don’t know. But it’s not a definite no.

And so if I’m right, what then? No 1st round picks for 2 more years and hacks chucking the ball while we wait for the most divisive player in the league to get out of football jail, with a drip drip drip of tabloid headlines and toxic news as it moves it’s way through by the courts, all the while our cap number is spiking. A player that I and quite a few other lifelong Browns fans would and could never support or wear the Jersey of is going to save us after (at the very least) 18 months to 2 years, maybe significantly longer, of not playing or practicing. What a disaster. I wouldn’t hate it so much if I didn’t think we were actually pretty close to seriously contending. Now we have to just pray that the leagues mood miraculously sweetens and everything just falls our way. Very very poor risk management. Where have we seen this before???

Last edited by 10YrOvernightSuccess; 05/22/22 11:53 PM.



"Team Chemistry No Match for Team Biology" (Onion Sports Headline)
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,474
Likes: 795
B
Legend
Offline
Legend
B
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,474
Likes: 795
Originally Posted by Baker_Dawg
Really cool, does he also discuss his tactics for preying on young women?

Give it a rest.

"Okie" dokie


If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.

GM Strong




[Linked Image]
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,754
Likes: 261
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,754
Likes: 261
I find it interesting that for his supporters, Watson can repeatedly go on national TV and declare his innocence and in not so many words accuse the women of doing nothing more than spreading lies. Yet, when it's announced that the women are now going to go public with HBO so that their side of the story can be told as the victim rather than from a bias reporter, Watson supporters are crying foul. There have already been numerous contradictions between Watson's public statements when compared to his depositions. Statements like he'd never treat women that way because he has a girlfriend to admitting he had numerous supposed consensual sexual interactions with some of the women to she ended the session and was crying so I apologized but didn't know what I did to make her cry and she refused my calls.

If this guy's name was Bob Smith, a local dude that was accused of this crap, people would be calling for his head. However, because his name is Watson the football star, we won't question his story changes and demean the women at every opportunity. If the allegations are true, Watson isn't just a creepy fellow, this dude is a SERIAL SEXUAL ABUSER. There have been 24 complaints, 22 of those have civil suits against Watson with an additional 18 that have had some type of interaction with Watson of which we have very little details around those 18 interactions. That's 42 women that have admitted having an interaction with Watson. How many more are out there that we don't know about?


Watson is innocent until proven guilty. I believe that should play out. However, Cleveland playing this dude and allowing the cases to be delayed so he can play is a bad look for the Browns and the NFL. The fallout will be huge for the Browns and the NFL if Watson is allowed to play and ultimately found guilty of the accusations against him. On the surface, it sure appears that Watson was trolling Instagram looking for massages with happy endings. His celebrity allowed him to push the situation. If true, that's a Serial Sexual Abuser by anyone's standard and he should not be playing until resolved. Just my HO.


Just "KICKING THAT CAN DOWN the ROAD"
1 member likes this: mgh888
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
I hope your wrong ! Everything you wrote is very reasonable and plausible - but I hope to goodness you are wrong.


The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Quote
I find it interesting that for his supporters, Watson can repeatedly go on national TV and declare his innocence and in not so many words accuse the women of doing nothing more than spreading lies. Yet, when it's announced that the women are now going to go public with HBO so that their side of the story can be told as the victim rather than from a bias reporter, Watson supporters are crying foul.

Who are these supporters? Also, who are the biased reporters? Almost all of the articles out there are throwing shade at Watson.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Likes: 136
E
Legend
Offline
Legend
E
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Likes: 136
Peen you have the legal background not I so please educate me on somethings.

To my understanding the DA decided not to pursue any legal action. This however doesn't mean its done and over as in he went to trial and the verdict is Not Guilty and you cannot be tried again for the same crime.

I bring that up only because I read somewhere that around 20 witnesses have showed up that were not involved with any action but its about DW's sexual actions from their experience. The article I read said that this is a new development and criminal action against DW is possible as there is more of a case to build around. Legally is this possible still? And when would it be officially over on the Legal side of things. not Civil side??? Thanks in advance and any other dawg out there in the legal know how please go right ahead.


Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!

GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,759
Likes: 116
S
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
S
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 1,759
Likes: 116
Ther words are be taken seriously, but Watson's are not? Talking about unfair treatment. Just because they are going on HBO, doesn't mean they are being truthful. Maybe they are, I'm not in a position to say, but I don't see how this makes them any more credible. Seems to me, that you in no way will ever give Watson the benefit of the doubt. Whether he did it or not, condemning him before the facts are clear is typical of the people in this country now. No longer is innocence before being found guilty being applied.

These women going on TV is tainting the jury pool. I also have to wonder how much they are being paid to do it.

Last edited by Steubenvillian; 05/23/22 08:15 AM.

"The Elf is killing the Curse"
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
Originally Posted by steve0255
I find it interesting that for his supporters, Watson can repeatedly go on national TV and declare his innocence and in not so many words accuse the women of doing nothing more than spreading lies. Yet, when it's announced that the women are now going to go public with HBO so that their side of the story can be told as the victim rather than from a bias reporter, Watson supporters are crying foul. There have already been numerous contradictions between Watson's public statements when compared to his depositions. Statements like he'd never treat women that way because he has a girlfriend to admitting he had numerous supposed consensual sexual interactions with some of the women to she ended the session and was crying so I apologized but didn't know what I did to make her cry and she refused my calls.
.

I can only give you my take on this paragraph - but I don't see any commentary that Watson's words are less or more truthful or sincere or serious than anyone else's. I do not see this paragraph as saying the women's words are more or less serious than Watson's. I believe the comment is a reaction to some posts on here that suggested that it was unfair that the women got to tell their story on HBO and that it would be one sided with no way to verify if it was truthful and no cross examination etc. There is a comment to the potential conflict of testimony from DW but I don't think that's the main thrust of the point made. Just my understanding on the comment is that DW and his representatives have repeatedly talk in the media about their innocence, their seeking a trial to clear his name etc - and that was all accepted without any reaction (I don't think there should be) - but when the women get air time to tell their side, there was talk of gag orders and how DW's lawyer might be able to claim a mistrial - when essentially all that's happened is that the media is reporting each sides account/version/story. Of course, the HBO deal is going to be longer, more in depth and generate more press - so it's not truly equal and opposite, but I'm not sure how/why/what you do to deal with that other than to remain somewhat skeptical of everything you hear that can't be verified or doesn't pass the smell test.

Last edited by mgh888; 05/23/22 08:54 AM.

The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,205
Likes: 586
O
Legend
Offline
Legend
O
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,205
Likes: 586
If you can't discern the difference between maintaining your innocence (usually when asked) and putting out interviews to work the court of public opinion, I don't know what to tell you.

IIRC, Buzbee said early on that his goal was a settlement ($$$). These interviews and the leaked transcripts are being done by the accusers to work the court of public opinion in their favor (IMO, towards a settlement). I'm not criticizing what they're saying (their truth is their truth, not mine to criticize)... but I can't view this as anything other than biased/slanted for a strategic purpose. I'm not going to take what they're saying as the whole truth and make a judgement call on Watson.

The decision to delay court proceedings so he can play the season was not an outright win for Watson. There's going to be a lot more of this the longer it drags on.


There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.

-PrplPplEater
1 member likes this: FrankZ
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Likes: 53
P
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Likes: 53
There are several things that are extremely disturbing about this entire situation....And it there is plenty on both sides...

The timing of all of this is extremely fishy especially with relationships of the Lawyer and Texans ownership. The character/reputation of Buzbee is one of a sleezebag ambulance chaser that only deals in high profile cases and is not concerned with justice but rather money from a profession where 97% of the time leads to settlements. He even stated his whole plan was concerning the civil cases....because he doesn't make as much money if the criminal cases were to happen (he isn't involved as it would be the DA's)...The tactics being used are completely about "trying in the court of opinion" and not within the court of law. Mob rule...I cannot respect that...Other things are the fact that after these incidents took place, that some/many...of the women continued to work with him and some even tried to develop personal relationships. The fact that sexual events happened in what was supposed to be a professional setting(consensual or not). The sheer number of masseuses'\therapists he has used. I am sorry but COVID isn't a viable excuse. That some/many of these women were not qualified for the job he was hiring for...(in those situations misunderstandings can and will take place...on both sides). Where he was finding these women. The lengths he would go to obscure the events taking place...ie the hotel he frequently used, the people he used to help set these appointments up. The consistency of his story with the inconsistency of some of the women's stories, when you might expect the opposite to be true. The fact he is willing to pay more money to clear his name than to settle and get this over with. The fact that 2 separate Grand Juries found no reason to even take this to a criminal trial when as the saying goes, "A Grand Jury will indict a Ham Sandwich". That means no rape, no assault, and most importantly, no solicitation....you would think that they could have found at least 1 count of any of the above considering the number of accusations...

So much that is messed up in this...And I have trouble believing anyone who has made a determination concerning these incidents. On either side...

Speaking of Grand juries: Ballpeen, you mentioned "unless it goes back to criminal" when pointing out these were civil cases. With 2 Grand Juries decisions, can you expand on what might bring this back into a Criminal Court? Obviously, I would think new evidence to see the light...but if such evidence existed, why would it not have been presented in the other possible indictments???


I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...

What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
1 member likes this: Versatile Dog
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
I agree with nearly all your post.

The one area I disagree is the notion that the Grand Jury not indicting is significant and that you can "indict a ham sandwich". between !% and 2% of all sexual abuse cases (from rape to harassment etc) result in a conviction. I've posted links - the numbers that actually get prosecuted are very low. 30+% of rape/attempted rape (not what DW is accused) never even gets reported to the police. I honestly don't believe that a DA not moving forward with prosecution means much other than perhaps the DA not wanting to spend time on a high profile prosecution he has a 98% chance of losing.

Other than that I think you are spot on. And to be fair - while many debate the various minutia or tone of posts, I think most on this board have reserved judgement and are not proclaiming one way or the other. I have seen other media sites (The Athletic for one) where many comments are black and white in favor of exonerating Watson or convicting Watson on the limited amount of information we have at the moment.

Last edited by mgh888; 05/23/22 10:16 AM.

The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,754
Likes: 261
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,754
Likes: 261
Sound Familiar?

Watson: I wouldn't do anything like that because I have a girlfriend too I had consensual sex with those women.

Clinton: I did not have sexual relations with that woman too a BJ isn't sex.

Call it what you might but with a minimum of 42 women to have now come forward (there could be more), Watson is either a serial sexual deviant or a serial sexual abuser. Eventually we will find out.


Just "KICKING THAT CAN DOWN the ROAD"
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
j/c...

I'd expect Hardin to respond after the episode airs tonight.


Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,300
Likes: 987
Legend
Online
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,300
Likes: 987
"Really cool, does he also discuss his tactics for preying on young women?"


There is no call for you to make that remark.

You have your view and that is fine. Think what you wish.

Just because others do not feel the way you do does mean they are pro "preying on women."

There are other ways people can feel about Watson and they don't need to be attacked and painted in the light you wish to cast.

2 members like this: Versatile Dog, mgh888
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269

1 member likes this: FL_Dawg
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
Originally Posted by Milk Man

It might not be HBO - and I don't begrudge them doing this because each side would do the same as the other given the roles being reversed .... but this is certainly more than responding to a question and maintaining innocence. jmo


The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Originally Posted by steve0255
Sound Familiar?

Watson: I wouldn't do anything like that because I have a girlfriend too I had consensual sex with those women.

Clinton: I did not have sexual relations with that woman too a BJ isn't sex.

Call it what you might but with a minimum of 42 women to have now come forward (there could be more), Watson is either a serial sexual deviant or a serial sexual abuser. Eventually we will find out.

#openminded

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
I agree w/a lot of what you say and especially the parts about trying the case in the court of public opinion and the mob rule. I think it's fairly evident that the attorney wants to use the negative attention levied at Watson, the Browns, and the NFL as leverage to get a large settlement before the cases go to trial. It may just work. Who knows?

Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,954
Likes: 386
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,954
Likes: 386
I suppose we will see how deep "DEEP" really is.

Could be an interesting listen.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Originally Posted by Milk Man
j/c...

I'd expect Hardin to respond after the episode airs tonight.


The statement by the Buzbee Law Firm, especially the part beginning w/the words...."This firm..." and all the way to the ending our a great example of trying the case in the court of public opinion and trying to create a mob mentality.

It's his job to do so and one cannot deny him that right, but it's also cheesy as can be. I don't know if it is because I had to sit through parts of episodes like The Peoples Court or Judge Judy while waiting in the doctor's office, but I have always turned a side eye on those who began their cases in Civil Court rather than Criminal Court.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 17,267
Likes: 1330
M
Legend
Online
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 17,267
Likes: 1330
Originally Posted by Milk Man
j/c...

I'd expect Hardin to respond after the episode airs tonight.


The HBO show might end up providing little in regards to what is real in this situation but it could mean everything to the NFL in terms of PR. Watson's team better have reaction plan.....similar to the opposing party just after a SOTU address. smile


Tackles are tackles.
1 member likes this: mgh888
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,205
Likes: 586
O
Legend
Offline
Legend
O
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,205
Likes: 586
Losing like they are in the court of public opinion could very well result in significant damage to Watson. They absolutely must respond (or might as well move to settle).


There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.

-PrplPplEater
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,452
Likes: 74
1
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
1
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,452
Likes: 74
People like to think the “court of public opinion” is just not relevant or important or shouldn’t be in situations like but, hello, it’s THEE most important aspect that his lawyers and the team should be concerned with managing. The criminal aspects of this have fallen by the wayside leaving only the civil and in the civil proceedings of celebrities, especially when it includes salacious issues, nothing matters more than the court of public opinion. Just ask Johnny and Amber. Deshaun could very well win most or all of his civil cases and lose the public opinion one. In fact, he’s getting epically dunked on as we speak. Losing that means a long suspension and a much more darkly forever tainted reputation.

Nobody is going to change anyone’s mind on this board about whether he’s a scumbag or just a very unlucky gold-diggers target or something in between but something I think most might agree on is that it’s being managed HORRIBLY. Dude should have settled… yesterday! Mere moments after the grand jury(s) declined. Just get it the hell out of the public and NFL brass’s sight lines. It’s only going to get louder and uglier until the day the nfl is essentially forced to drop the hammer. The Browns giving him that contract upped the stakes exponentially and made the end game for the Buzzby very clear… the court of public opinion is now where Deshaun lives and dies.




"Team Chemistry No Match for Team Biology" (Onion Sports Headline)
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 895
Likes: 51
L
All Pro
Offline
All Pro
L
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 895
Likes: 51
Originally Posted by oobernoober
IIRC, Buzbee said early on that his goal was a settlement ($$$).

Most lawyers want a settlement outside of a criminal trial. I'd almost say all. A judge/jury is an unknown, you want the outcome you can be satisfied with and not have to roll the dice of chance. I am sure Watson wants a settlement as well, just with different terms.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Likes: 53
P
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Likes: 53
Originally Posted by mgh888
I agree with nearly all your post.

The one area I disagree is the notion that the Grand Jury not indicting is significant and that you can "indict a ham sandwich". between !% and 2% of all sexual abuse cases (from rape to harassment etc) result in a conviction. I've posted links - the numbers that actually get prosecuted are very low. 30+% of rape/attempted rape (not what DW is accused) never even gets reported to the police. I honestly don't believe that a DA not moving forward with prosecution means much other than perhaps the DA not wanting to spend time on a high profile prosecution he has a 98% chance of losing.

So I do get where you are coming from...but please consider that I am not arguing conviction rates but rather the indictment process itself. I also understand that many rape cases never go to trial because of plea bargains for lesser crimes(I believe well over a 3rd of reported...*I could have that wrong)...therefore does this skew any statistics (for or against) because the charge ends up different and or because it did not go to trial??? There are so many issues when it comes to this topic...and it is sad, unfortunate, and startling. For a variety of reasons we do not do a good job of convicting in these situations...But again, the crime/offense is not what I am considering here. It is the ease and rate of the indictment process.

So back to indictments...From a Columbia Law Research Study...
https://www.law.columbia.edu/news/a...nd-jury-practice-light-ferguson-decision

Generally, grand juries will issue indictments in most if not all cases. The standard for indictment is probable cause. In the context of the grand jury, the Supreme Court has stated, “Probable cause, we have often told litigants, is not a high bar: It requires only the ‘kind of “fair probability” on which ‘reasonable and prudent [people,] not legal technicians, act.’”[3]

The grand jury process is now so routinized in most state jurisdictions that it has become a pro forma proceeding to deliver an indictment for a prosecutor. It is for this reason that most lawyers say, repeating the famous expression of the former chief judge of the highest New York state court, Sol Wachtler, that prosecutors can get grand juries to “indict a ham sandwich.”[4] According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, “U.S. attorneys prosecuted 162,000 federal cases in 2010, the most recent year for which we have data. Grand juries declined to return an indictment in 11 of them.”[5] These statistics may not be representative of all state grand jury practices – some of which are more pro forma in ordinary cases and others may require hearing a range of evidence that federal prosecutors are not required to present.


This is why I think it significant. Because these numbers suggest, that regardless of the crime purportedly committed...it is almost guaranteed to be indicted. Especially since the Defendant doesn't even get to provide his side of the story. It is completely in the Prosecution's hands...with 22 allegations (granted not all pressed charges, but many did) there wasn't a single count that they couldn't/wouldn't indict him for???? Twice????? In a legal sense...it is significant.


I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...

What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
Originally Posted by oobernoober
Losing like they are in the court of public opinion could very well result in significant damage to Watson. They absolutely must respond (or might as well move to settle).

None of which was hard to forecast or predict. Whether people might want to say Buzbee is sleazy or whatever - he is doing exactly what the American system allows him to do - he's doing it to maximum affect. If the boot was on the other foot I think people would need to be ignorant to think Rusty Hardin wouldn't be doing the exact same thing. I don't like it - I think it stinks and it is anything but just or fair ... but it is what it is and we have to sit and watch it all and keep our fingers crossed.


The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Quote
People like to think the “court of public opinion” is just not relevant or important or shouldn’t be ...

I don't believe that people think that. I do believe that a man's innocence or guilt should be decided in the courts and not by public opinion. Those are two different things. Some of us believe in justice and others believe in mob mentality.

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,205
Likes: 586
O
Legend
Offline
Legend
O
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,205
Likes: 586
Just want to respond to say I agree with you re: it is what it is. I acknowledge Buzbee's right to leverage everything he can to get his clients the max. He's doing his job the best he knows how to do. I wish this type of thing could be a little more honorable (if that's the right word), but that's not Buzbee's fault and I acknowledge that.


There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.

-PrplPplEater
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
Everything you said makes sense and is reasonable. I was trying to find out what % of cases reported (sexual assault/misconduct) are indicted. I can't seem to come up with a clean number. The numbers of prosecutions is low - the number of convictions is ridiculously low. What you said is clear - but I think in cases without witnesses and "he said/she said" - I just don't see strong evidence that grend jury's lean towards indictment. If I can find anything that indicates a high proportion - heck a middling amount - of reported cases lead to indictment by a GJ I could be persuaded to think otherwise.


The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
Originally Posted by oobernoober
IIRC, Buzbee said early on that his goal was a settlement ($$$).

During the podcast that Hardin just did (that I posted) it was interesting to hear Hardin say they were close settling when the a trade of Watson to Miami was in the works last year. Hardin said the trade broke down in part because Buzbee wanted NDAs of the settlement signed so as to not make the dollar amount public. Two of the women also did not want to settle at that time. Hardin would not agree to this and stated that Buzbee did not want it to become public how much of the settlement money he was getting and how little was actually being paid out to the women.

The podcast was an interesting listen. Hardin also said it was he who was pushing for criminal complaints to be filed, strongly believing Watson was not guilty of what he was being accused of doing. Hardin stated the court of public would never believe Watson's attorney proclaiming his clients guilt, hence him wanting a full criminal investigation.

Worth the listen.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Interesting and not surprising.

I do have a question for you. Did Hardin attack the reputation of the women who are part of this suit? I'm hoping he did not.

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,452
Likes: 74
1
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
1
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,452
Likes: 74
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Quote
People like to think the “court of public opinion” is just not relevant or important or shouldn’t be ...

I don't believe that people think that. I do believe that a man's innocence or guilt should be decided in the courts and not by public opinion. Those are two different things. Some of us believe in justice and others believe in mob mentality.

As oober says just above me, this falls squarely in the “it is what it is” bucket. The American legal and media environment is just what it is. Hey, it shouldn’t rain on birthday either.

I deeply fault his lawyers and the team for playing checkers when anyone with a passing understanding of the world celebrity sex scandals knows this full contact chess. The team should have stipulated with the contract that Deshaun and his lawyer would do everything in their power to get this flushed as quickly as possible. Nope. He’s going to fight for his dignity and Innocence long after that ship sailed, rightly or wrongly, I’m the public mind, never to be revisited. Someone really and truly should have diagramed all the possible outcomes for him. It makes it very clear that if you’re a celebrity in a sex scandal with anything short of a complete slam dunk outcome in your favor, you make it go away, quickly. Every other outcome is: you lose. And even more so in this case: Browns lose.




"Team Chemistry No Match for Team Biology" (Onion Sports Headline)
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
He did not.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Thank you.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 13
D
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
D
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 13
Who do you think brought this problem to Cleveland Pitt? Berry and Haslam? Watson is probably going to be suspended, just don't know for how long.

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,456
Likes: 1269
Originally Posted by 10YrOvernightSuccess
The team should have stipulated with the contract that Deshaun and his lawyer would do everything in their power to get this flushed as quickly as possible. Nope. He’s going to fight for his dignity and Innocence long after that ship sailed, rightly or wrongly, I’m the public mind, never to be revisited. Someone really and truly should have diagramed all the possible outcomes for him. It makes it very clear that if you’re a celebrity in a sex scandal with anything short of a complete slam dunk outcome in your favor, you make it go away, quickly. Every other outcome is: you lose. And even more so in this case: Browns lose.

Interestingly, Hardin discussed that when the trade last year with Watson to Miami was being discussed, Miami's owner, Stephen Ross, was requiring that all civil matters be resolved/settled prior to agreeing to the trade. I mentioned a few posts up how close this trade was and why it fell through.

Hardin said after the Miami trade fell through and once the criminal matters were resolved, several teams were willing to allow Watson and his attorney to handle the civil cases in the manner they best see fit for Watson. Watson was appreciative of this gesture by the Browns. Hardin said the Browns have been great about allowing Watson and Hardin handle the civil cases without interfering in the process.

1 member likes this: Versatile Dog
Page 3 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 9 10
DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Deshaun Watson Again

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5