DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Deshaun Watson Legal Issues cont.

Guess who said this?

Quote
It's not about "if he knew". It's about the results of his actions. His money went directly to a human trafficking ring.

And this?

Quote
His money went to a human trafficking ring. He's a celebrity. So his name is out there. Poor Robert Kraft....

If you buy weed and it comes from a Mexican cartel, it's not your fault you're supporting a Mexican cartel. Cause you didn't know where it came from, right?

And guess who said this?

You see, some people actually consider things as they unfold. Sometimes their initial gut reaction to things isn't the final conclusion they reach as they learn more. Surely as a teacher you expect people to be open to that, right? I mean surely you aren't trying to say that no matter what we learn we should stick steadfast to what we initially thought, right?

And then sometimes as things unfold the facts that come out only reinforce our initial gut instincts to solidify them.

It seems you expect people ignore facts and evidence as it unfolds and try to attack people who do not.

As someone who's been banging the drum about the difficulties of women accusing men (especially powerful men) of this stuff, I find your citing a lack of accusations a little curious. On top of that, many of these women couldn't speak English.

I'll circle back and try to restate what I said before.

The two situations are nowhere near as close as defenders of Watson would like, but also not as different as people who want to nail Watson to the wall would lead you to believe. Again, I'm not commenting on Watson's situation, just the difference in how it's being treated compared to Kraft's and not being able to square away that difference with the facts available.

Kraft got caught up in a sex trafficking investigation. Alleged video evidence was suppressed. Kraft got away due to a lack of evidence. Watson is facing civil lawsuits, and one of the things people rail on is the difficulty in producing evidence of said crimes.

When cops were talking to the masseuses at Kraft's joint, they couldn't get reliable evidence due to language barrier. Earlier on in all the articles talking about this, it's cited that sex traffickers use fear/intimidation/violence to frighten the trafficked into silence. Folks who want Watson to hang frequently mention how difficult it is on the accusers to step forward.

Kraft was charged, but those didn't stick. Watson wasn't charged, but apparently that means nothing.

Kraft was let off with less than a slap on the wrist, while Watson is looking at 'an unprecendented punishment'.... This is despite both being under the same Personal Conduct policy and both not under any punishment on the legal side of things.

I encourage everyone to read the articles I posted on the previous thread about Kraft and the sex trafficking trade. I encourage everyone to just do a simple search about "robert kraft and sex trafficking." Read the dozens and dozens of articles on the topic. Proving things are difficult for those trying to go after the sex trafficking trade. Educate yourselves. No need to believe me or Pit. Decide for yourselves.

With that said, I am not saying Kraft is guilty just like I won't say Watson is guilty. I leave legal matters up to the courts and don't go around trying to hunt witches like many others do. I won't use words like "predator" or "rapist" when to convince others of another man's guilt.

What I will say is this. The NFL is NOT the legal system. I think it's wrong for them to act as investigator, judge, jury, and executioner in these types of cases. However, as it currently stands, they have the Personal Conduct Policy in place. All I--and many others--are asking is for the NFL to follow its own stated policy of "Everyone who is part of the league must refrain from “conduct detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in” the NFL. This includes owners, coaches, players, other team employees, game officials, and employees of the league office, NFL Films, NFL Network, or any other NFL business."

There can be little doubt that Watson's situation can be seen as detrimental to the integrity of the league. However, the situations w/Kraft, Snyder, Jones, and Irsay also have eroded the integrity of the league. We ask that the discipline be fair and equitable rather than allowing some to walk away w/out even a bad word while throwing the hammer down on someone else.

If the NFL doesn't want to play fairly, we suggest that they be held accountable for their misdeeds and unfair practices. We demand full disclosure in all of these cases so that the public is rightfully informed of how the NFL handles its business. I'd love to see what the federal courts would have to say if there is an internal investigation of the NFL and it's unfair and biased investigations of personal conduct policies.

First I have stated that I thought Kraft got off too easy. I'm sure there was a language barrier when the cops were talking to the masseuses at the scene. But let's not pretend the prosecutor did not get an interpreter and question all of these women for the trial involving the massage parlor. If she didn't she should have been fired.

The conduct policy is the same. The infractions are not. I known the numbers 24 and counting mean little or nothing to some. Not so for others.

Whether they spoke english is not the point.. we don't know if all the ladies in the Watson case can speak english..

As for the Sugarbabies or Escorts,, the end result is the same, and it's "HAPPY"!

It was an investigation of sex trafficking in the area. Over 300 arrests were made at other locations where it was found to be true. No arrests were made for it at the spa Kraft was caught in. As long as we don't lead people to believe the words being mentioned in the same articles end up meaning anything. Because they actually don't.

It's too bad the NFLPA agreed to and the players sign a contract agreeing to allow the NFL to "act as investigator, judge, jury, and executioner in these types of cases." But no acountabilty for that either I see.

Twenty-four women are a lot, but let's consider the number of victims of the illegal sex trafficking just for a moment.




Full article:


HomeFederal Response on Human Trafficking About Human Trafficking
About Human Trafficking
Share

Human trafficking, also called trafficking in persons, has no place in our world. As both a grave crime and a human rights abuse, it compromises national and economic security, undermines the rule of law, and harms the well-being of individuals and communities everywhere. It is a crime of exploitation; traffickers profit at the expense of their victims by compelling them to perform labor or to engage in commercial sex in every region of the United States and around the world. With an estimated 24.9 million victims worldwide at any given time, human traffickers prey on adults and children of all ages, backgrounds, and nationalities, exploiting them for their own profit.



In the United States, traffickers compel victims to engage in commercial sex and to work in both legal and illicit industries and sectors, including in hospitality, traveling sales crews, agriculture, janitorial services, construction, landscaping, restaurants, factories, care for persons with disabilities, salon services, massage parlors, retail services, fairs and carnivals, peddling and begging, drug smuggling and distribution, religious institutions, child care, and domestic work.



Forms of Human Trafficking*
Forced Labor: The term forced labor** is defined in two separate sections of the U.S. Code. In the criminal statutes of Title 18, it encompasses the range of activities – recruiting, harboring, transporting, providing, or obtaining – involved when a person uses force or physical threats; psychological coercion; abuse of the legal process; a scheme, plan, or pattern intended to hold a person in fear of serious harm; or other coercive means to compel someone to work. Once a person’s labor is obtained by such means, the person’s previous consent or effort to obtain employment with the trafficker does not preclude the person from being considered a victim, or the government from prosecuting the offender. In the customs-related statute of Title 19, it is also defined in connection with the prohibition on the importation of goods produced wholly or in part by forced labor, including forced child labor; convict labor; and indentured labor under penal sanctions.

Debt Bondage: U.S. law prohibits the use of a debt as a form of coercion to compel a person’s labor. Some workers fall victim to traffickers or recruiters who unlawfully exploit an initial debt assumed as a condition of employment, while in certain countries some workers “inherit” the debt. Although contract violations and hazardous working conditions for migrant laborers do not in themselves constitute human trafficking, the imposition of costs and debts on these laborers can contribute to a situation of debt bondage. In other cases, employment-based temporary work programs in which the workers’ legal status in the country is tied to a particular employer present challenges to workers who would like to flee from such an employer.

Domestic Servitude: Working in a private residence can create unique vulnerabilities, particularly because what happens in a private residence often is hidden from the world, and it is easy to isolate a worker in a private residence. Domestic workplaces are often informal, connected to off-duty living quarters, and not shared with other workers. Such an environment is conducive to exploitation because authorities cannot inspect private homes as easily as formal workplaces. The use of informal, or even verbal, employment contracts compounds vulnerability. Foreign domestic workers are particularly vulnerable to abuse due to factors such as language and cultural barriers and lack of community ties.

Forced Child Labor: Although children may legally engage in certain forms of work, forms of slavery or slave-like practices – including the sale of children for exploitation, forced or compulsory child labor, and debt bondage and serfdom of children – continue to exist, despite legal prohibitions and widespread condemnation.

Sex Trafficking: When a person is required to engage in a commercial sex act as the result of force, threats of force, fraud, coercion or any combination of such means, that person is a victim of human trafficking. Under such circumstances, perpetrators involved in recruiting, enticing, harboring, transporting, providing, obtaining, advertising, maintaining, patronizing, or soliciting a person for that purpose are guilty of the federal crime of sex trafficking. This is true even if the victim previously consented to engage in commercial sex.

Child Sex Trafficking: Any child (under the age of 18) who has been recruited, enticed, harbored, transported, provided, obtained, advertised, maintained, patronized, or solicited to engage in a commercial sex act is a victim of human trafficking regardless of whether or not force, fraud, or coercion is used. The use of children in the commercial sex trade is prohibited both under U.S. law and by legislation in most countries around the world.

Prosecution, Protection, Prevention, and Partnership
The “3P” paradigm—prosecution, protection, and prevention—continues to serve as the fundamental framework used around the world to combat human trafficking. The United States also follows this approach, reflected in the United States’ Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 , as amended (TVPA), and in the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (Palermo Protocol) . In addition, a fourth “P”—for partnership—serves as a complementary means to achieve progress across the 3Ps and enlist all segments of society in the fight against human trafficking.



Victims of Human Trafficking
Human trafficking victims can be of any age, race, ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, nationality, immigration status, cultural background, religion, socio-economic class, and education attainment level. In the United States, individuals vulnerable to human trafficking include children in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems, including foster care; runaway and homeless youth; unaccompanied foreign national children without lawful immigration status; individuals seeking asylum; American Indians and Alaska Natives, particularly women and girls; individuals with substance use issues; racial or ethnic minorities; migrant laborers, including undocumented workers and participants in visa programs for temporary workers; foreign national domestic workers in diplomatic households; persons with limited English proficiency; persons with disabilities; LGBT+ individuals; and victims of intimate partner violence or other forms of domestic violence.

Who are the Traffickers?
At the heart of this phenomenon is the traffickers’ aim to profit from the exploitation of their victims and the myriad coercive and deceptive practices they use to do so. Traffickers can be strangers, acquaintances, or even family members, and they prey on the vulnerable and on those seeking opportunities to build for themselves a brighter future.

Human Trafficking vs. Migrant Smuggling
Human traffickers respect no boundaries. The crime can include, but does not require, movement. Human trafficking is distinct from the separate crime of migrant smuggling. Human trafficking occurs when a trafficker uses force, fraud, or coercion to compel another person to work or engage in a commercial sex act, and does not require crossing a border. By contrast, migrant smugglers engage in the crime of bringing people across international borders through deliberate evasion of immigration laws. While these are distinct crimes, individuals who are smuggled may become vulnerable to and victims of human trafficking.

How Many Victims of Human Trafficking Are There?
It is hard to find reliable statistics related to human trafficking. The quality and quantity of data available are often hampered by the hidden nature of the crime, challenges in identifying individual victims, gaps in data accuracy and completeness, and significant barriers regarding the sharing of victim information among various stakeholders. For these reasons, data and statistics may not reflect the full nature or scope of the problem.

In February 2020, the Senior Policy Operating Group (SPOG) Public Awareness & Outreach Committee created a Guide for Public Awareness Materials (non-binding) to serve as a public resource that reflects the common messaging, standard statistics, and shared guidelines on images that SPOG agencies use when creating public awareness and training materials. The following reflects standard statistics used by the U.S. government:

International Labour Organization
The International Labour Organization (ILO) and the Walk Free Foundation, in partnership with the International Organization for Migration (IOM), released Global Estimates of Modern Slavery in September 2017. This report estimates that, at any given time in 2016, approximately 24.9 million people were in forced labor. Of these, “16 million were in the private economy, another 4.8 million were in forced sexual exploitation, and 4.1 million were in forced labour imposed by state authorities.” The definition of forced labor used in this report is based on ILO Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), which states in Article 2.1 that forced labor is “all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily.”

This report also estimates that 40 million people were in “modern slavery” at any given time in 2016, but this figure includes both the estimate for forced labor and an estimate for forced marriage. Consistent with current implementation of U.S. law, it is recommended to use only the 24.9 million estimate when referring to human trafficking. While some instances of forced marriage may meet the international or U.S. legal definition of human trafficking, not all cases do. Note further that the term “modern slavery” is not defined in international or U.S. law.

National Human Trafficking Hotline
The National Human Trafficking Hotline provides on its website data sets on the issue of human trafficking in the United States. These data sets are based on aggregated information learned through phone calls, emails, online tips, and texts the hotline receives and should not be confused with prevalence studies or closed-out confirmed cases. Note that the hotline receives several types of calls in addition to those about human trafficking cases. The hotline does not verify the accuracy of information reported, but it determines on a case-by-case basis whether the information should be passed on to an appropriate local, state, or federal investigative and/or service agency equipped to investigate the tip and/or respond to the needs of the potential victim.

Annual Federal Reports
The U.S. narrative in the U.S. Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report and the Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons include updated federal statistics.

Ah yes. The ol' "Anybody that disagrees, even if it's only about a tangential topic, it means that they support sexual assault".


I don't know why I'm surprised that it's impossible to have a nuanced conversation with you active on the board. That's on me, I guess.

That's not what I meant at all. I simply mean it has a greater influence on the opinion of some than it does others. Some put more gravity in it than others. It seems you took that comment differently than I intended it.

Sex trafficking is a terrible thing and a crime. It's just not a crime when it didn't happen. It's not something you can just go around throwing against a wall and hoping it sticks in every case where it doesn't apply to try and bait the conversation away from the actual topic at hand and think everyone is just going to buy into it.

Nobody is preventing that, but we can all express our opinions.

There's about 4 posters that ....well, have pretty much taken over this place.

I could say "1+1= 2", and they'd be all over it, trying to change the subject, etc.

Actually, maybe 5 of them.

Watson has not been charged w/a crime. Kraft has not been charged w/a crime. Somehow, one is guilty even and the other is innocent. LMAO-------folks just making up their own rules.

j/c...

Raise your hand if you said Watson is guilty and Kraft is innocent.

There was this.

And how many times have we heard that Watson not being charged w/a crime doesn't prove his innocence?


You don't like their tactics in the Political forum when they twist your words, make up things that you never said, move the goal posts, etc........yet, you really believe they are different people in this forum and the PFF? LMAO man.

Kraft was never accused or charged with anything to do with sex trafficking, try again.

Hey, you are picking up some of their tricks. LOL.......take a hike, Fate w/your double standards.

HE WASN'T CHARGED WITH SEX TRAFFICKING.

Find a better example instead of copping out.

No crap! Never said he was. I said neither was convicted of a crime. Jesus, you sound just like those guys.

And again............I am NOT saying anyone is guilty or innocent. I have maintained that from the beginning and I said it years ago in the Kraft thread.

My argument is about the punishment handed out by the NFL because of their Personal Conduct Policy. Both men were accused of crimes and both men brought negative attention to the league. Furthermore, the issues w/Snyder run far, far deeper.

Alright, we'll try again. Who said Kraft was innocent and Watson was guilty??

Furthermore, I was not even talking to you. You have interjected yourself into my conversations quite a bit lately. Like your stupid over and over and over post. Yet, you never say a word when we heard 22 times over and over and over again. I didn't seek you out and call you out. I am responding to you calling me out. You did the same crap w/Baker back in the day. Siding w/the board bullies. Now, be like Pit and play Last Word Larry and I'll move on. Not interested in talking to you again. Take your football question to 888.

THIS IS WHAT YOU WROTE WHEN DISCUSSING KRAFT AND WATSON:


Sure as hell sounds, looks, reads like you absolutely framed the discussion as if Kraft was involved with sex trafficking. That's your words, in context. You would call other posters that did that LIARS. That's how you roll.

No-one is lying about what you said but you. There was a conversation about Kraft's case and Watson's case .... your exact words are shown above. You can't put those back in the bottle.

And right on cue you cry victim and call others liar. You have no shame.

I didn't interrupt your conversation at a dinner table, this is a message board. "Your conversations" lmao


Liar, liar, pants on fire. I called that out numerous times. Wanna place a bet on it, say a 30 day hiatus?

I bet I’m in your group you dislike. I don’t care in the slightest. You sound like your having a meltdown, lashing out because you can’t have your way, and trying to take our ball and go home. I’ve been told 1000 times if you don’t want unwanted comments, don’t post on a public discussion forum.

I have also agreed with some of your points as well as calling you out for what I see as you trying to bully posters. And nobody has been more active in the DW threads than you.

Who am I trying to bully. I don't even speak to 888 and Pit. Once in awhile, I will address the board after there are repeated lies being told about me. For example, the Kraft and sex trafficking lie. Everyone in the world knows he wasn't charged w/sex trafficking. To suggest he was would be ignorant. That isn't what I was doing. I was talking about him frequenting a place that was alleged to participate in sex trafficking. I posted numerous articles to back up my point. I have tried to clarify my position multiple times, yet he continues to say I am a liar. It gets old. So again, who am I bullying?

And bullies run in packs. I don't run w/any group. I stand alone w/my views. I don't jump in and join 3-5 others in piling on one particular poster. Guys who do that are the bullies.

No - but without reason and without justification when you get called out you say "liar liar" and resort to name calling. It's a tried and tested pattern we all see. Followed by overly nice posts to others praising them for their posts and fairness. We all see it and see right through you.

Thinking this isn't about race is nuts, JMHO, DW had consensual sex with some of the suers. If he'd force anyone don't you think they'd have had physical damage- all suers complain about psychological damage. Do you really think there are NO suers in the me too movement- they'll get money and I want mine. Billionaires and millionaires are NEVER approached/ or favored due to their money- it doesn't happen. Several of these extremely damaged women had MULTIPLE engagements- DW was absolutely terrible. This situation is just like our political problems- half see no issue, it is sexual/normal activity around massage parlors forever- these masseuses knew nothing about DW's reputation with other masseuses- they were always "professional" and parts of the human body are just not to be seen or touched- just terrible. Other side- white and money- white billionaires can do what they want AND the law doesn't apply to them, and white culture says going to massage parlors is ONLY for massage/ never shall sex happen, it can't.

Don't know how old you or most posters- veterans of Southeast Asia war, millions- many vets were exposed to Asian differences between sex and what Mom taught. Millions of guys went to massage parlors and most left with happy faces. Just saying there are huge sexual difference in our society. The line isn't black and white. DW should be held responsible just like the other rich guys.

The way you treated Dave was like a bully, and the way you talked to Purp the other day was the same. You do it without realizing what you come across as I think, but go back and read your responses once in a while. You have a habit of attacking or belittling those who don't agree with you or don't share your views. And you do what 888 described often as well. I know I do that in PP, we all do, but not on the rest of the board. And you can be mad at me for pointing it out, or lump a group of us together under whatever label you want, but that doesn't change the fact that you create more friction than any NON-TROLL poster on the board. That's not me attacking you, it's just an honest observation Vers. You have every right to your opinion and to debate, but you get defensive at the drop of a pin. And then you lash out at everyone who disagrees, I have no idea why you feel the need to do that or if you even realize you do it. But you do it quite often. Not trying to offend you Vers, it is what it is.

I know PIT gets the same kind of rap, and his posting often annoys those he's debating, but in comparison, he's more honest in his self-reflection and owns it.

Why do you post the same article in two different threads?

Maybe you should direct your anger where it belongs. Against Deshaun Watson and the Cleveland Browns.

Anybody with 26 civil law suits hanging over their head regarding sexual harassment will be suspended or put on paid leaves by any professional employer until all the cases are solved. If the Cleveland Browns had any sort of back bone and a normal moral compass they would never sign a player with such a uncertain background until all the law suits are solved or the cases are financially settled. Look at the Miami Dolphins how they handled the problem. Just common sense. Can you honestly imagine a school teacher, a doctor, a nurse, a politician, a CEO or similar continue to work with so serious allegations hovering around their head. Off course not. Any sane person would be so distracted and worried about the future that working as normal isn’t possible. Not exactly rocket science to understand this. Only a narcissist would continue as normal but that’s off course not what he is, Watson, or?

Only the clowns from the Browns ignored all the warnings signs and moved on with a monster contract without using any sort of common sense. A pathetic press conference and some lame statements about investigations and how “comfortable” they all are.

Now the NFL has to deal with the Browns incompetence and that’s why this mess is a national debate with no winners.

All this started with one player using over 100 masseuses in a period less then 2 years. Not one single named NFL player has gone on record searching for similar services using almost hundred different masseuses when they seek happy endings, not even close, not before and not now.

So ask yourself who started this tragic drama.

Did you seriously expect them too? Like a "hold my beer" situation?

Others have done the same thing. Why is it a big deal now? But, to explain.......the article contained "legal" information and it also contained information about why the NFL would have a hard time keeping Watson from being our "starting qb" this upcoming season.

Once again, w/out determining the guilt or innocence of any of the owners or Watson, I see discrepancies in how punishment is doled out by the NFL when it comes to owners vs players. It's often been said that the NFL doesn't need a legal conviction to suspend/punish anyone because of the Personal Conduct Policy.

Here are the first two paragraphs of that policy.



Now, consider some of the public information regarding Daniel Snyder, the Washington Redskins, I mean, Commanders owner. How is being investigated by Congress for the alleged incidents described in the following article not in violation of the Personal Conduct policy?


Pursuing the path of how the unevenly NFL deals w/violations of its own Personal Conduct policy in regards to owners vs players is essential to Watson's defense.

Maybe the NFL can just fine Watson $10 million and not suspend him? That's what the NFL did w/Snyder. Here is a reaction from the plaintiff's attorneys after the NFL's decision.

Nobody as far as I know. The only thing is that if you treat an owner one way and then treat a player another, that's not how it should be.

No - it did not. It was an opinion piece - apparently by a legal firm, presumably trying to gain free PR and a reputation. The piece was based on the letter of the law - it did not relate to a private company with a conduct policy that is outside the legal system. But it did fit with your agenda, so I understand why you spammed it on two threads.

I think everyone agrees there has always been a disconnect between how the owners have been 'punished' - compared to how players have been dealt with. Not everyone agrees with your attempt to frame the Kraft case as being one of sex trafficking. Not everyone agrees that the Watson case is about race. As hard as you try to silence others and convert them to agree with your opinion - I don't think it's working.

I wouldn't call it spamming. I liked the article and found it informative.

Just because you don't like it doesn't make it spam.