DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Deshaun Watson Again

Daily for that guy.

Here is the interview with Buzbee that aired yesterday on 92.3 with Jason Lloyd and Dustin Fox.

https://www.audacy.com/923thefan/sp...ee-i-dont-have-a-lot-of-faith-in-the-nfl

I agree.

j/c:

It's pretty bad when a person who says I believe in letting the courts decide to determine one's innocence or guilt is chastised and those who have already determined one's guilt and have slapped disgusting labels on the accused get no pushback on their stances.

I'm good w/where I stand, even if it is alone.

Referred to the prosecutor is the step that happens before a possible indictment, no?

Someone posted up a well-written link that kinda laid this out (albeit in generic terms... meaning it might be different depending on state, judge, etc).

IIRC, it talked about the part we're actually debating in terms of Watson... when a charge is presented to the grand jury, how often do they return an indictment. That article I'm trying to recall seemed to indicate that when a charge is brought, indictment is usually pretty likely.

I'm not trying to argue the other parts that have been brought up (women not coming forward out of fear, prosecutors not wanting to take the allegation to the GJ, and ultimately those allegations resulting in a guilty charge/plea). I'm trying to focus on and gain clarity on that one specific step in the whole process.

For me it comes down to the question of what actually happened. There are different perspectives. How does one indicate that they want a masseuse to work on their groin without pointing in the general direction of other organs? From DeShaun's perspective, it could have been "hey I want you to work down here" (intending his groin muscles). From the masseuse's perspective, "hey I want you to work down here" was perhaps perceived as touch my junk. My conflict comes from one the thought process of shouldn't a masseuse be familiar with massaging that area? Watson may have been used to the team massage therapist knowing the routine of working the groin. For him, it was a normal part of getting a massage. For many athletes it's a normal part of their regimen.

The whole I'm scarred for life because I touched man parts seems odd coming from someone that advertises giving massages. Spend any time in the profession (doing work around the core/groin/upper legs) and it's bound to happen. There doesn't have to be some ulterior motive, but incidental contact. However, the perception of that contact can be different from each individual. Yet, willingly entering into that situation as a masseuse seems to me to be acknowledging the risk of potential contact.

As long as there are no signs of force, it's hard to know what to do. Was there coercion? Or were there women jumping to their own conclusions? Or has there been some fabrication? It's impossible to know from my limited access to relevant information.

Was there failure to communicate or a breakdown in communication? Probably, and, sadly, there usually is in this world.

link

Link This one shows 99.99% indictment rate but is for federal grand juries.

Link This one is interesting, but lacks numbers. It comments on some flaws in the grand jury system.

It's hard to find more directly applicable percentages. The numbers do seem to be consistently high.

Not sure if you were the one that originally posted that (or similar) article, but thank you for posting that. It was helpful and informative.

Who is he "actively recruiting" to join him in his opinion? I'll help you out. Nobody.

Just a reminder of what you actually said....


Once again, who are these people? Because so far you've done nothing but fail to back that up and act like that's not what you said. And you are the expert on class?

No, but when you're facing 22 lawsuits and claimed you had sex with none of them only having to admit you did later damages your credibility and provides a judge and jury with the fact you aren't being honest with them. That damages your credibility in court.

Sort of like when you said this.... "The only exception I have is when people are desperately trying to recruit others to trash the player and team."

Everyone knows that's false. It doesn't get anyone banned but it says a lot about you not being honest.

Did he ever actually claim to have not had sex with any of them?

No. He’s only said he didn’t do anything inappropriate (he did).

So, here's the questions that Watson needs to be answer that could clear up the negative public opinion:

1) The Houston Texans had in house therapists that were available to every player on the team. Why are you using outside therapists who have no idea of what is needed by you the Pro Athlete?
2) You have a standard reservation or room at the Houstonian. Why? How many other Texans have rooms on-call reserved at the Houstonian? How many massages took place at the Houstonian?
3) Therapists use full sheet coverings for massages. You demanded to use your own small size towel against their wishes - please explain your demand that is outside the normal protocol for a licensed massage therapist.
4) As an athlete, you have specialized needs from the therapist. It would be extremely beneficial to have a regular therapist that was aware of those needs. You used at least 42 different therapists (that we know of) some of which were not even professionally licensed. Please explain your thought process on the number and the use of unlicensed therapists.
5) You have admitted that you had sexual relations with 3 of the therapists that you claim was consensual. How many times did you use each of those therapist's if your intention was to only get a professional massage per your deposition? Were any of the three unlicensed?
6) Why would a professional athlete that is dependent on his body for his career ever allow an unlicensed therapist to work on his body even one-time when his body is the key to his employment?
7) Why would a Pro Athlete be using Instagram to locate therapists when you had access to the team's professional group that would have gladly recommended a quality outside therapist group for your needs?
8) How many total different therapists did you use during the timeframe in question and will you willingly provide their names and dates?
9) Of all the therapist that serviced you during the timeframe in question, how many did you have sexual relations with?

Simply answering these questions truthfully would go a long way in changing public opinion.

Steve, every sane person without an unhealthy addiction to a football team knows the answers to your questions and what it adds up to.

None is more blind than those who do not wish to see.

Are you kidding? Answering those baited questions will do absolutely nothing to improve public opinion of him.

People don't want the truth. They want something they can beat their chests about.

He could give these (potentially true) answers and some people wouldn't believe him. Perhaps behind closed doors he has.

1. He likes meeting new people and trying new methodologies to see what works best. He does use team therapists. He's seeking additional treatment in an attempt to find an optimum regimen.
2. He can afford it and doesn't like bringing strangers into his home.
3. The covering depends on the type of massage being given. If you need work on groin tightness, a standard size towel is an impediment. He's comfortable with nudity. Most professionals that work with athletes for groin work are as well.
4. He was trying to find a "regular therapist." Unfortunately most that he found would rather proposition him and then act outraged when he wasn't into it.
5. After the 3 women initiated sex, he didn't use them again because that wasn't what he wanted. While uncertain of the licensing, they all advertised professional massage services.
6. Licenses are overrated. A masseuse improves issues or doesn't. If they don't, he moves on. Non-traditional therapies have been found effective in numerous studies.
7. Because he was looking for something that worked better for him than the professionals he'd tried (seeking constant improvement is what keeps him as an elite competitor.) He's a regular user of the Instagram platform and it has easy searchability and a large selection of choices.
8. He doesn't have the names and dates because he's not an obsessive hoarder and follows the recommended practices for account security and data management as recommended by his employer.
9. 3 of the therapists aggressively initiated unasked for sex during massage sessions. He did not seek their services again.

There are ongoing legal proceedings. Airing things in public is not NFL standard operating procedure and is generally advised against by practitioners of the law.

Sadly, public opinion doesn't always reflect reality. Reality tv isn't the only media selling made up stories scripted for impact and ability to draw eyes.

Hopefully the truth will come out whatever it may be.

Great answers, sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

Oh and I have an ocean front condo in Arizona if you are interested. Dirt cheap.

It's these people...........................

SHOCKING Details Emerge on Former Texans QB Deshaun Watson & the Houstonian Hotel in Houston!

https://original.newsbreak.com/@black-and-white-sports-1587637/2581982428071-shocking-details-emerge-on-former-texans-qb-deshaun-watson-the-houstonian-hotel-in-houston?s=ws_tw

Meanwhile, Pit is still trying to act like no one is trying to get others to believe that Watson is guilty. LMAO

I agree. Mightily. You face court hearings, NFL reps, sensationalize it on HBO. Even if you answered whatever questions, these and others not listed, because there will certainly be no end to them regardless of your response, my question is simpler: To what possible end? I see no requirement to convince, sway, or win over public opinion, which is not even vaguely defined as a group, or appease public opinion in an attempt to, well, what? Change minds? Persuade? Are we entertaining a "public" that is patient, open minded, swayable? Use this thread of fans as proof of the metric and measure of that reality. I feel this has been blown up, giving it a sideshow flavor that is rarely seen in NFL discipline cases.
If he is found at fault, he should pay up in appropriate fashion. The NFL should clarify where the rails are. And he should be allowed to move forward having done so. I am not trying defend any wrong, but public opinion vilifying him seems wrong. I am all for due process;; I have some real problems with undue process; prosecution bent can become persecution. FWIW

Very well said, Bard. Elegant craftsmanship of expressing yourself. Well done.

Thanks, Vers. I am ready to lock this up, or until the ruling or verdicts are in and we see its outcomes. That is just me.

Off the topic of the trials and more on to the topic of his attempts to endear himself to his team. He is off to a good start. Even Nick Chubb...probably one of the biggest Baker supporters is getting on board...The Bahamas Trip...Yeah...a little overboard but still a good gesture...I would hope that with the contract he signed, that he would have done the same thing without the trials over his head....but any thought on that is pure conjecture. But I really want to speak about one more public incident. The Rolex. If you have been under a rock...During Anthony Walker's press conference at OTA's...after the first question Watson gifts him a Rolex Box...As no one saw him open the box...which is appropriate...we can only assume it was a Rolex...The reason for this is also assumed is that Walker gave up his #4 (that was special to him and worn last year) so that Watson could wear it. It is in fact known that Walker did not sell his number which is often the case concerning numbers in the NFL...a negotiated compensation is the norm. But Walker freely gave his number. No deal struck...a gracious offer on his part.

So concerning the Watch....2 ways to look at this....Watson is also being gracious and working towards team comradery. Second...He chose to do this in front of reporters in stead of privately in the locker room because he was working on his public image. And therefore the watch has an ulterior motive.

I think both are true. I think this is a heartfelt gesture on Deshaun's part. But the timing is a shrewd and smart move on his part to chip at his public perception (perhaps by him or his PR team). And I also lean towards the heartfelt gesture being higher on the scale. This is why.

I don't have links only because I have not the time to grab them now...BUT...what is less widely reported...if only a few spots...it has been discovered that not only did Watson give him this watch (that probably costs as much as a car), but he has also donated over $50,000 to one of Walker's charities, and has promised to buy all of Walker's Suits this year. (Not totally sure what that means...lol). I have also heard about Watson already donating money (without overt public recognition) to several organizations in the Cleveland area. This showing an already charitable side to him which he regularly did in Houston as well...charitable actions that he is not overtly seeking recognition for...Aside from POSSIBLY the public display with the watch....none of this has anything to do with the trials...and frankly that was my purpose...Just putting it out there...

I completely agree, but I think it feels blown up simply because we haven't had much of anything else to discuss, so this one topic gets beaten to death over and over and over, endlessly droning on with each "side" remaining entrenched and spending effort trying to get their perceptions understood by those on the other side that make a habit of mischaracterizing stances in the interest of slinging mud and taking cheap shots. So, it isn't any bigger than it was, but it definitely is over-hashed, but, again, only to the extent that the "debate" keeps devolving into myopic misrepresentations. That's just normal when it has gone on this long and there isn't anything new, because let's face it... arguing on the internet hasn't changed a single opinion in 30 years.

I agree that he definitely should be allowed to move forward, but public opinion gets to vilify him all they want. It is no different than O.J. Simpson, R. Kelly, Casey Anthony, George Zimmerman, or any other high-profile case where there was an acquittal or declination to indict. He has to go through the process and the process NEVER moves as rapidly as folks might want, and public opinion debates/arguments simply swirl and rage infinitely faster. It would be great if the NFL clarified where the rails are, but the problem there is that the NFL constantly says there are rails, but the NFL's rails are much more like the emperor's new clothes. They've never actually put them in place and that's probably because the entire concept of "personal conduct" is ambiguous to begin with. In the end, there will almost certainly be a suspension simply due to his conduct drawing so much negative attention to the NFL and for putting the League in this position to begin with; and if they determine that this is cost the NFL any money at all (jerseys not being sold, ticket sales down, whatevet), then the suspension will be longer. They don't like things that mess with revenues.

It's also being blown up because it's a big deal. :-p


No pro football team is going to be a roster of choir boys, and it's like the worst kept secret that these guys mostly operate under a different code of conduct that can give them a little extra leeway in their personal affairs if their on-field performance is at a certain level. But the Watson case (if true) is pushing that limit. It's an important topic of conversation that might be more productive if we had info coming out at a faster rate (not going to happen with ongoing legal stuff).

No doubts with any of that, at all.

I think you highly undervalue the need and influence of public opinion. Public Opinion just got the US Women's Soccer players a decent chunk of money despite the fact that many of the things they offered in court were not valid. People in the public spot light can ignore it to their possible peril.

I'm asking you to show where anyone has. And you got nuthin'.

I agree w/the part about there isn't much else to talk about and that it's getting beat to death. I also agree there are those of us who are taking a side. I would like to add that in my opinion, there is a difference in the maliciousness and objectivity between the sides. We have words like predator and Rapey being used. Terms like sexual deviant and comparisons to serial killers. Those are direct attempts from one side to convince others of a man's guilt. The other side has not made any claims that Watson is innocent. They have not said that all the women are liars despite what some may want you to believe. Instead, that side believes in allowing the legal system to do its job and that a man is innocent until proven guilty. I believe that those differences tell a story on what is going on here. Just my opinion.

No they are not. They are simply the opinions of some people. As much as you try to twist it, that's untrue. If anything, using the terms you named would only entrench others into not changing their minds. When you use inflammatory language because you believe that to be true, such language only acts to make others even firmer in their opposite stance. But then you already know that.

Absolutely false.
This has actually been a constant claim since the beginning of a very, very large portion of people.
Repeated use the "innocent until proven guilty" mantra along with constant and citing of the lack of indictments, all while ignoring the fact that a person STILL be guilty and not be Found Guilty, or even Charged, for their crimes.

\

For me the silliest discussion point in the whole topic is "Innocent until proven guilty", in my opinion. Probably for the biggest reason is that it really isn't true. Every single day this happens without a court being involved. As a visible example, any posters on this thread lashing out at people that have a different opinion and making claims against other posters. They are doing their actions and judging other people without them being found guilty in a court of law. Yes, a person is held to be legally innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, that is how the justice system works. It does not mean the person did not commit the actions until a court says so.

Ditto

That explains a lot of what is allowed to go on here.

You know what else would be unbelievable? An overzealous DA with political aspirations working with the police to manufacture DNA evidence.

That's going both ways in this case.

||

That is what the word "Any" means.

My statements are mine and were never about what I undervalue; they are about what I value. That process will not include publicized spectacle where "making up our minds" is its own end unto itself. My opinion on this won't move the scales or define the outcome. This won't be decided by polls. No more than this argument can or should be. I think it is quite possible and very desirable on the parts of some people to offer opinions that are overvalued, potentially treating them as factual. They are not. I said what intended in the way I intended. In my opinion, it is not deficient. Get your own if you like.

People being allowed to freely speak their minds? People being allowed to call other people on their crap when they spout falsehoods?

You seem to think you're making a point, and probably somehow think you're even taking a jab, but you're doing neither.

Get over yourself, you're really not that important. Hell, nobody missed you when you were gone. smh.