DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Deshaun Watson Again

If DeShaun Watson was a 4th string WR for the Calgary Stampeders
This is a non story. This seems motivated by extortion tatics.
These massage therapists are they that naive?
At some point every massage therapist gets propisition for sex
It comes,with the profession
Every female massage therapist I've known and talked to has been
Approached for a adult encounter.
Massage therapists are usually attractive and cute at the very least
You never see obese massage therapists.
They use their looks to help get clients
My ex neighbor was owned a hair salon/ parlor for 8 years
In my community
She used advertise in the Scene magazine all the time
Women at times,Make convincing actress's
I don't buy the "I'm traumatized act" act one bit
Male rich athletes especially QBS are often examples of influence
Ego, bravado, holier than thou, I'm better than you attitudes
Before you take on a high profile client , do your homework on that
Client

Speaking of revisionist history. He refused the Browns until they made him an offer he couldn't refuse. Once the $$$ was what he wanted, suddenly his decision changed. All of the factors you mentioned were in place when he turned down the initial offer from the Browns. The $$ is what his decision was based on.

Point me in the direction of an article saying the above is true.

When it came to the allegations that the women made, no. The only thing of note is that I found their stories consistent with what they've said all along.

As it pertains to DW's attorney Hardin, yes I did learn something. That is that he's very smart when it comes to how he presents things. As we saw with Buzzbee he was actually on the show. He was the face of supporting his clients. Hardin was not and that was a very smart move. As usually happens involving everything from rape to sexual assault or sexual impropriety, the first line of defense is to attack and undermine the character of the accuser(s).

Could you imagine how that would have looked if Hardin, as a man would have looked had he had said what that female attorney said on the show? It would have been seen as terrible. So he instead let a female attorney do his dirty work.

The one false narrative we keep hearing from those here on the board is that somehow Hardin is such a great guy and that Buzzbee is some kind of ambulance chaser. That's no less of an unfounded attack as would be trying to undermine the character of the women themselves. Buzzbee is no less outstanding at his job than Hardin is. And he has the track record to prove it in major cases over a long period of time.

But some people try and act that one side is painting a false narrative and the other side isn't.

The court of public opinion is going very badly for him and the team. The school shooting news has perversely drowned out some of it at the moment but I think at this point the dye is all but cast. I don’t know if anything is left to be said and certainly no one’s mind changes at this point. I can’t (won’t) read another article or post or watch anything until either the league hands down the punishment or some new bombshell comes to light. I think the league is feeling great pressure to act and they won’t be faulted by anyone apart from the Browns and their fans for going nuclear and maybe lightening the load later if need be. But if they toss him out for the year (or longer) the noise, in their ears, drops precipitously, it’s out of their hair and off their plate.

I didn't see you do what you're asking of me. Then maybe you have a rational explanation of why watson turned down their initial offer and only agreed to come here after they decided to make him an offer he couldn't refuse? Everything you listed was already in place when he turned the Browns down the first time..... except the money.


Browns rejected by Deshaun Watson

Cleveland is reportedly out of the running for Houston quarterback, so now what?

https://www.dawgsbynature.com/2022/3/17/22983232/cleveland-browns-rejected-by-deshaun-watson

I have also made similar points before. The NFL is a corporation that is concerned with image. The deal for me is that sadly the law is often times little more than a chess match. Each move leads to the conclusion. Both attorney's are involved in that chess match. Both facts and innuendo will keep coming out from both sides. You will see both attorney's claim things they say is evidence turn out not to be real evidence at all by the court.

The thing is this is probably the one single issue that will decide the fate of the Browns for at least this season and may include seasons moving forward. I can understand how you may be tiring of hearing about it. But for me as I said, it's the single biggest issue that will decide the success or failure for possibly seasons to come. I see it as the biggest single issue facing the Browns. I invested over 55 years of my life being a Browns fan. So I find this issue extremely important for me to follow closely. To each their own I always say.

It's not.

Agreed, talk about the Grand Jury's decisions was quickly drowned out by the same people who keep talking about the 22 victims and how that the GJ's decision didn't prove Watson was guilty. Of course, the HBO interviews did and the accusations of the alleged victims is proof that Watson is guilty.

Similarly, there was recent talk of why Watson wanted out of Houston and that conversation was nixed once I posted two articles about the alleged racism that was prevalent w/in Houston's organization and how the search team recommended two minority hires for GM [not the HC as some want us to believe that] because those stories don't quite fit the narrative that are being forced down on throats on these threads.

Yet that was well after he claimed he hadn't had sex with any of the women because "I have a girlfriend". So moving forward that will certainly play into the credibility issue. Sort of like claiming he apologized but has no idea what he was apologizing for. Yeah, that happens all the time.

Deshaun Watson’s admission of sexual activity with three of the 22 plaintiffs could become a major problem

Posted by Mike Florio on May 25, 2022, 11:03 AM EDT
link

In 22 of the massage sessions that resulted in civil lawsuits being filed against Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson, Watson admits — through his lawyers — that three of the massages resulted in consensual sex.

“What little sexual activity did occur was consensual,” attorney Rusty Hardin recently told Gabe Feldman during a podcast appearance. “And there are only three occasions in our cases that any type of sexual activity occurred.”

On Tuesday, Hardin’s office separately distributed a video from Hardin that, among other things, reiterated the admission that consensual sex occurred with three of the 22 massage therapists

“As we’ve said, as Deshaun has insisted under oath, each of those three occasions were consensual and instituted by the women,” Hardin said. “But in the other . . . 19 cases there was no sexual activity. And Deshaun has already given nine depositions — 11 now — and sworn under oath that there was no sexual activity except those three incidents, and they were consensual.”

Another member of Watson’s legal team, Leah Graham, made a similar admission during a conversation with HBO’s Soledad O’Brien.

“Well, in every massage, I will tell you he did go, intending just for a professional massage, and only those three instances where sexual conduct occurred — consensual sexual activity — it occurred after the massage session had ended,” Graham said. “And Mr. Watson has testified and is insistent that that sexual activity was initiated by the plaintiff in every single instance.”

The lawyers presumably have made these admissions regarding sexual activity because they have no choice but to make that admission. However, it’s hardly a strength of the case. In reality, it’s a potentially significant weakness.

Broaden the lens. Watson was getting massages from a broad array of female therapists. Between the 22 who have sued him and the 18 who later vouched for him, that’s FORTY. For a guy who has access to any and all massage services that he would need or require.

The fact that he admits, through his lawyers, that three of the 22 massages that resulted in lawsuits ended with consensual sex underscores the potentially persuasive argument that he was looking not only for massages, but for something more.

Yes, he insists the three instances of sex were consensual. Yes, he claims the massage therapists initiated it. But if Watson is finding massage therapists on social media and after 13.6 percent of those massages actually engaging in post-massage sexual activity, is it unreasonable to conclude that he entered the massage with the thought in mind that maybe, just maybe, it will turn sexual? That maybe, just maybe, there’s something he can do to nudge things that way?

The bulk of the cases against Watson arise from allegations that he tried to nudge things that way. The fact that, in three cases, sexual activity occurred necessarily adds credibility to the allegation that, in the other 19 cases, he at least attempted to move the massage in that direction.

Several weeks ago, the presiding judge allowed the 22 plaintiffs to seek evidence regarding whether Watson engaged in sexual activity with the 19 massage therapists who provided statements of support for Watson. This ruling — and our fair and even-handed treatment of it — actually triggered an angry response from Watson’s camp.

Why would it make Watson’s lawyers mad? Because they know that if Watson can be painted as someone who had a habit of lining up massages on social media with strangers and hoping that he’d get something more than a massage, it meshes with the claims made by those who claim to have been traumatized by his affirmative effort to get something more than a massage.

I don't believe he suddenly admitted this. I think it's been out for quite awhile now.

The wording might have been a poor choice but the fact remains that Watson has changed his original story from no sexual contact with any of the claimants to now there were three. "Several weeks ago, the presiding judge allowed the 22 plaintiffs to seek evidence regarding whether Watson engaged in sexual activity with the 19 massage therapists who provided statements of support for Watson. This ruling — and our fair and even-handed treatment of it — actually triggered an angry response from Watson’s camp." It would appear that the expected sexual activity is starting to look like Watson's intentions was to get more than a massage from all of the women. IMHO, you don't get that type of negative response unless you know that it's going to put a negative light on your client. At a bare minimum, Watson is sure looking like a serial sexual deviant without question. We'll have to wait and see if he is deemed to be a serial sexual abuser.

And some still ask "Who are these people...?

“What little sexual activity did occur was consensual,” attorney Rusty Hardin recently told Gabe Feldman during a podcast appearance. “And there are only three occasions in our cases that any type of sexual activity occurred.”

That's from mac's article above. I don't know the definition of recent. I don't know if his story has changed.

As these stories get repeated and aired I guess its going to make some harden their position. Personally I think we just need to wait for the NFL to make a decision and for the civil cases to come to trial.

And some will refuse to answer it while making snide comments as they refuse to man up and address the person that asked them.

Then they will make comments on the board trying to sound like they know the definition of what class is.

Did he say (or infer) that he didn't actually have sex with any of the women early on in a deposition?

When asked if he found them attractive he said he didn't look at them as being attractive because he had a girlfriend.


Now anyone can take what they wish from that but saying you didn't look at them from a standpoint of being attractive or not means you certainly weren't looking at them in a sexual manner. You know, because he had a girlfriend.

17-34 games...Should be in jail.

I have a few questions:

--Does having sex behind your girlfriend's or wife's back warrant a suspension from the NFL? How many guys would be left if that were the case?

--This one is for the younger crowd. When I was younger, a high percentage of both sexes had a lot of sex w/multiple partners. It was a thing to go to clubs and find someone to go home with. Have things changed so much that having sex w/others make you a sexual deviant and does it warrant you being suspended from working at your job? Are young people shunning casual sex these days?

--Are the decisions made by Civil court cases now more important than the decisions of Criminal Courts?

--Should a person lose their ability to work due to accusations that have not been proven to be true?

--Have we moved on [or regressed depending upon your point of view] from "innocent until proven guilty" to you are guilty because I want you to be and/or accusations that have not been proven to be true?

Who are these people you speak of? LMAO

In case you haven't been payinh attention literally hundreds of men have lost their jobs and resigned from positions while protesting their innocence if unproven allegations.

Regards DW there is no civil court case vs criminal court case. If he were found guilty in civil court are you implying it should not matter?

Having sex with someone other than your partner is between you and your partner. Claiming you had no sexual interactions with women claiming otherwise and and then changing that story is concerning. To some more than others apparently.

As I have stated before, I believe Watson should get an indefinite suspension until all the civil cases are heard. My thought process on that is because I think he may be a serial sexual abuser. It is unfortunately well known that there is a type of abuser who goes from one victim to the next. This describes serial abusers and serial sexual harassers. Three or more victims makes you a serial offender.

While the motivation for the abuse also stems from a combination sex and power, there is a pattern in which victims are groomed or entrapped with premeditation and focus, abused, and then discarded as new victims are obtained. The abusers are predators, which is particularly apt as the accruing new victims is always a large part of their focus. In recognizing serial abuse there are unique obstacles: Serial abuse is driven both by sexual interest (deviant or not) and power and control. Predators often develop a double-life. The lives they live in public are exemplary and conspicuous in rectitude, while privately they cultivate abusive technique and proceed callously if not cruelly. Contrary to general belief, public behavior does not predict private behavior. Predators are often driven, and so they develop a false aura of being special through accomplishment or status. Examples are media personalities, politicians, and even Pro Athletes. When rumors emerge, they are not pursued because there is somehow a belief that special rules should apply to 'special people.' However, contrary to what our culture believes, being driven, while it can be pivotal in 'getting ahead,' is not a sign of specialness.

Especially with adult or teen women victims, predators often use shock and surprise (such as suddenly disrobing or exposing genitals) to stun, freeze and silence victims, whose partial lack of fending off behavior is sometimes malignantly construed as implied consent. Reference the tactics of Harvey Weistein and Louis CK among many others.

So Dr. Steve, how many times has Watson visited your office and how many actual psychological evaluations have you performed on him?

Good God. You people are unbelievable and some are still asking Who are these people you speak of? Really?

So I was right. I don't recall him claiming he hadn't had sex with any of the women.

Dog, so defensive dude. First, thank you for addressing me by my proper title being I am a doctor - well a retired one.

Second, if you have more than three victims then it's serial. The definition of deviant behavior is: actions or behaviors that go against social norms or expectations. Social norms are unwritten rules that a society or culture deems as acceptable. Any behavior that violates social norms or formal laws is considered deviant. I would think that knowledge of having more than 42 different encounters with therapists with the expectation of a sexual encounter would be considered deviant behavior.

Thirdly, you do not have to agree with me - I expect you to be negative. It's also ok that you have that undying support for Watson. The big difference is I believe in the justice system and a speedy trial. You are ok with the victims waiting 7-months so your guy can play football - I'm not. Actually, I think we both want the same thing - a resolution to this issue. I just don't believe it's fair to the victims to give Watson another 7-months of a free pass. Why? because he's a football player - BS!

You did not answer how many times you psychoanalyzed him. I asked because you came to a clear-cut psychological evaluation.

I was not being defensive at all. I also don't think I am being negative by saying that I am not the judge, jury, and executioner. I think that is more fair than one who has already determined another's guilt. I would venture to say that assigning guilt is far more negative than saying I will let the courts decide. I also give some credence to the fact that two Grand Jurys refused to pursue the criminal cases while others acted like that wasn't even worthy of discussion and instead we kept hearing about how Watson was not innocent just because the GJ refused to indict him. I will also reiterate that I bet that the same people who said that about the GJ will determine that Watson is guilty if the Civil Courts any monies to Busby and his clients.

I also take issue w/your constant word usage of "victims." You have applied that label w/out any legal proof. As of right now, they are "alleged victims."While you may not think it is fair to give Watson a free pass for another 7 months, I say that he is certainly being punished in the Court of Public Opinion w/out any single court having proven that he is guilty of the crimes he has been accused of.

I want to address this sentence separately. My contention is that these Civil Cases would not even exist if Watson was not a football player and was just some dude working construction or a similar job.

Wow, man. You are all in on DW. We'll be so, SO much better with him at qb. GJ didn't ...... The women are liars, etc. Bashing Baker any chance you get and celebrating DW...

You are ALL in.

For the record............I have never once said the "women are liars. Once again, I really wish that the people in charge would not allow these false claims because if one does not address the false claim, and maybe even he does, there will be posters who believe the false claims.

I'd like to address the points about the Grand Jury and what the relevance of the rate of successful prosecution mean. Seems some are trying to bring that back as a means to exonerate DW - or claim that "you can indict a Ham Sandwich"


I asked before about the rate at which Grand Jurys indict in cases of Sexual Assault - to me that would be a direct link to DW and his situation. Those stats are not very easy to find - most sites deal with conviction rates (anywhere from 1.0-1.7% depending on the source) - the number of unreported sexual assaults (high - over 35%) etc. I eventually found this web site and article:

https://www.rainn.org/articles/what-expect-criminal-justice-system

It states - and I have no reason to doubt the authenticity - that out of 1000 cases of rape being reported - only 7 will be referred to the prosecutor. 993 out of 1000 won't get indicted is how I read that - someone can correct me if that interpretation is not correct.

Assuming that ratio of reported to un-indicted cases is accurate each can determine exactly what the GJ decision means to them. For me it means virtually nothing. It's why I think the Civil case will be important.

I'm still going to wait, but it looks more and more like DW is a rapey ass creep or outright predator. At this point, I wouldn't give a damn if he never takes a snap in a real game as a Brown. And if he does and wins, with this black mark on him, I want no part of that sliminess. And Vers, I love this team, so don't you say a word to me about my feelings and going elsewhere to root for another team, there would be a major fallout and board fight between us for that. Nope, I'll stay right here and say whatever I feel is needed.

Someone pee in your Cheerios today, bro?

Not only are the conviction rates horrible, and apparently the rate of cases even referred for prosecution being as bad, prosecutors get re-elected on winning records. With a Grand Jury, it is the prosecutor that must convince them that the case needs to go to trial... and we've all rehashed this entire sequence over and over already. A prosecutor that doesn't believe they have a strong enough case to win, especially in a high profile case, isn't going to be particularly motivated to push for a trial. Since a lot of these cases are "He said/She said", it's a safe bet that they'll never be tried. It's a sad reality, but it IS the reality of things. Without it being a rape where physical evidence would/could be collected, it's next to impossible to prove that something was or wasn't consensual, that some touching was or wasn't unwelcomed. It's an uphill battle for a victim and damn near a shield of immunity for the plaintiff.

The Season starts September 22nd. ( Yes it does.) Game 3. Home Steeler game, TNF II3 days,

Everyday. Just want to say my piece without an argument, so I prefaced it that way. I think I'm entitled to that.

I will say it again, if you and Watson for that matter believe that he is being mistreated in the eyes of public opinion then the easiest fix to that issue is to have your day in court.

Your interpretation of a psychological evaluation was clearly a definition of a serial abuser which I said I thought maybe could be applied to Watson because the "alleged victims" complaints would warrant that based on their statements.

Again, Watson could clear this up simply by having his day in court without the special treatment of getting a 7-month waiver to play football.

"I will also reiterate that I bet that the same people who said that about the GJ will determine that Watson is guilty if the Civil Courts any monies to Busby and his clients." Are you saying by your quote that Watson should be deemed innocent even if he loses the civil cases?

Probably right.... but that's why I said I'm curious... I think knowing what they were paid if anything would lead to some insight on what their motivation is...

That goes against another part of their site https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system

It shows out of 1000 instances 310 are reported. (I wonder how they estimate that if they are unreported...)
Out of 310 reported 50 lead to an arrest
Out of 50 arrests 28 lead to conviction of a felony and of those 28...25 will be incarcerated...

Which looks and IS horrible...But it is better numbers than robberies where 22 out of 1000 lead to conviction and 20 of those to prison...AND it has a better prosecution rate than Assault and Battery...(56% conviction rate to 39% for A&B)

So this is pretty disheartening on many fronts....but it isn't as bad as 7 out of 1000 RAINN has some good and helpful info on their site...which is why I find it odd that they are contradicting themselves...

And also I tried to look for indictment rates as well...we commented with each other about that...the RAINN site has some good info...but nothing about GJ's and indictments but rather arrests and convictions and that isn't the same thing...I will continue to look as well...but indictments are seriously common throughout all possible charges as that is the number I can find...and it is practically automatic. There is a reason why Lawyers prefer Grand Jury to a pre-trial hearing...A person facing a Grand Jury has ZERO power...NONE...there is no defense...and as the quote I posted stated......probable cause "is not a high bar"...

Folks, I know I am late to the party but I have been trying to read up on everything that has been written about DW. But even if he had sex with 3 therapists, if it was consensual, there is nothing there. If he did not force any of those women to stay at his house, or force them to touch his privates, then just like 2 GRAND JURIES came back with NO CRIMINAL charges!! Also, lets say DW did try to get those women to touch his privates, again, if he did not force them or prevented them from leaving, then at best, he is a creep!.. Not Rapey!! And BTW.. Ben Rothlisberger went in a bathroom and tried to RAPE a woman!!.... So what can u gonna suspend him on, being a creep?? Not when you have let previous dudes attempt Rape!!.. And for the record, Brett Farve was harrasing a woman and sending D**K pics!

Again, what more do we have from the two women who spoke out?? If I'm missing something, let me know