If you'll notice, I'm generally using it as a rebuttal to those claiming that somehow the settlement as evidence that it's the women who look bad because they settled. There's two sides to that coin and You haven't seemed to find any objection to those painting the opposite picture.
Fair, but me not objecting to every single strawman put up on this message board does NOT imply support. You explained one side and I responded with the other.
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Here's what I understand. He sought out 66 massage therapists in an 18 month time period. The Texans were so concerned with reports they had heard about his conduct, they even provided him with NDA's for the therapists to sign just to keep their mouths shut. 24 such therapists reported inappropriate behavior on his part.
pred·a·tor
1. an animal that naturally preys on others. "wolves are major predators of rodents"
2.a person or group that ruthlessly exploits others. "a website frequented by sexual predators"
Ah, so it's black-and-white and ignoring any evidence or perspective to the contrary. Side note: I love how you label the Texans' involvement as 'concern'.
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Somehow people think that time stands still. That society never changes. That somehow the fact that the NFL didn't address past mistreatment of women seriously enough is the perfect excuse not to address it properly now. That won't work anymore since the MLB said, "Hold my beer".
So now we're back to the tried-and-true reducto ad absurdem. Time does not stand still, but Tyreek Hill just signed his mega contract roughly a whole 5 minutes before Deshaun, and there hasn't been bupkus said about him. You have a person with a well-established track record of some pretty horrific stuff not getting suspended AND getting the mega contract. If Watson getting an unprecendented suspension makes sense, it's because the process that handed it out makes at least some degree of sense. Otherwise you're basically just cheering on a witch hunt.
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.
For whatever reason, for better or for worse, it seems that the NFL is minimizing its own case on the one hand while saying they are stalwartly pursuing an indefinite suspension on the other. The more I think about these actions, the more I believe that there is little chance that he gets a full season suspension. The NFL wants him to play; they just need to appease the public to some degree in the process.
Exactly how I feel. It's a coverup at worst and a sweeping under the rug at best, to keep DW on the field. Also makes it feel like there is a lot of information we will never hear.
It's only a witch hunt if you believe that the women are lying and watson is telling the truth. But to the extent that I don't care nearly as much if hardly at all about players of other teams verses the one I've followed and been a loyal fan of for over 50 years, you're right. I have no vested interest in them.
Here's something I think everyone should consider. If it holds validity it's an impressive and very strategic legal move on the behalf of watson and his legal team.
The settlement of the 20 lawsuits was reported on June 21'st. The NFL hearings began on June 25th. Many such settlements include sealing the evidence and placing a gag order concerning those cases. As such it could be that the NFL is not permitted to use those cases as a part of any of their hearings. There would be no documents or evidence that could be used concerning those cases. Food for thought.
Sometimes timing is everything. Let me guess, the settlements coming just four days before the NFL hearings is merely a coincidence?
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Nobody is supposed to be bashing their heads. I just imagined that people who thought a long suspension was appropriate would feel strong feelings about an NFL source talking about preponderance of evidence after having reportedly putting forward no evidence of coercion. I feel like I'm missing something here, and my previous posts were honest requests for help in understanding.
I wasn't being snarky or anything like that. I was just a little confused.
Let's face it, there has been a lot of negative pub directed at Watson. Most of it was led by Florio and a lot of others used his material to write articles of their own. Also, the NFL leaked that they were seeking a long suspension. Maybe that was a PR move? Maybe not? I just have maintained that I would wait until there was more evidence before I decided on whether he was guilty or not. I never believed those who said our FO was too stupid to not investigate the circumstances of the case. It appears, but is still not certain, that the NFL's case is not all that strong. Also, I have no idea how Judge Robinson will rule.
Let me try this from another direction. I'm also sincerely curious, since I don't think I ever asked your opinion on the questions below, just assumed what it would be.
What is your take on the NFL not presenting any evidence of coercion, and still pursuing an unprecedented suspension? You're really ok with a different/arbitrary punishment process for Browns players vs other stars in the league? You must've LOVED the Mangini teams, then... since your roster must be squeaky clean above anything else.
As for the settlements as they related to the NFL proceedings... I dunno if it works like that. Wasn't the NFL investigation going on for a quite a while before the settlements? If so, the NFL would already have the evidence in hand. You may be right, though. If you are, then I applaud the Watson team for finally pulling their heads out of their butts and playing chess vs the checkers they were doing before. If you can applaud Buzbee for how he prosecuted the cases within the court of public opinion, then I guess I can acknowledge Hardin finally getting with the program.
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.
You were confused probably because I was confused. I didn't take your post as snark.
I know that the NFL process is not the legal process, but doesn't it still have to make some measure of sense? That's what I'm not seeing.
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.
Nobody is supposed to be bashing their heads. I just imagined that people who thought a long suspension was appropriate would feel strong feelings about an NFL source talking about preponderance of evidence after having reportedly putting forward no evidence of coercion. I feel like I'm missing something here, and my previous posts were honest requests for help in understanding.
Would you agree that the NFL had to take a hard-line stance due to public opinion, especially after the Ray Rice debacle? There wasn't a ton of talk about severely punishing Watson. Goodell had said they would not put him on the Exempt list. There was excitement and networks and other media sites were following the Watson Sweepstakes once the GJ declined to indict him. The Browns get him and that first PC was [according to many who covered it]was the most tense PC they ever witnessed. Our local media was brutal. People try and deny that, but it was uncomfortable. I don't think that occurs in Atlanta or New Orleans. The national media went after this like sharks react to blood in the water. Florio led the charge. The NFL was almost forced to take a strong stand and I am guessing they purposely leaked they were seeking an indefinite suspension. I'm guessing that the case was never that strong against Watson to begin with, but the NFL almost was forced to take a very strong stance due to the power of public opinion. Most of this are just my opinions on how this played out.
What is your take on the NFL not presenting any evidence of coercion, and still pursuing an unprecedented suspension? You're really ok with a different/arbitrary punishment process for Browns players vs other stars in the league?
I deleted the snarky part so as to address the actual question....
Let me explain what you are basing your question on first. This report came from some anonymous source who "claimed" that he had some first hand knowledge this was true. I have addressed this several times. But just for you I'll address it again. Firstly there is no way to verify the source. Secondly as we have seen on this very board what some people see as coercion others do not. What some people see as evidence others do not. This is nothing more than one persons opinion of what was presented and those who support watson have run with it as though it's factual.
Quote
As for the settlements as they related to the NFL proceedings... I dunno if it works like that. Wasn't the NFL investigation going on for a quite a while before the settlements? If so, the NFL would already have the evidence in hand. You may be right, though. If you are, then I applaud the Watson team for finally pulling their heads out of their butts and playing chess vs the checkers they were doing before. If you can applaud Buzbee for how he prosecuted the cases within the court of public opinion, then I guess I can acknowledge Hardin finally getting with the program.
And yes, the NFL may have had those facts, but if the settlement included those records being sealed nothing contained in those records could be used. And yet you continue to repeat a false statement. Hardin was also trying the case in the court of public opinion. He just wasn't as good at it. If you actually believe he and watson weren't I can show you many statements put out by both Hardin and watson to try and sway public opinion.
This wasn't a court of public opinion move on the part of Hardin. It would have been a legal move to circumvent all the facts of the case being looked at in the NFL hearing. A very smart and shrewd legal move none the less.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Jeremy Fowler is reporting that one of the two parties is going to submit their briefs tomorrow [Tuesday.] No word on the other party or which party is submitting their brief tomorrow. He said Sue Robinson is probably going to take her time and release a detailed report. The latter could be interesting. LOL
League produces no evidence of coercion. Says ruling will be all about preponderance of evidence.
Honest question... how does someone who's expecting a long suspension read this and not want to bash their head against the wall. Help me understand what exactly is going on here.
Many have posted that Roethlisberger got away with rape when he actually was never charged. It was an alleged accusation that didn't stand up as viable to the Grand Jury to bring charges. Yet those same people supporting Watson's issues as being innocent until proved guilty have no problem calling Bub Been a rapist without ever being charged. The 'Not being Charged" sure sounds an awful like what has happened to Watson at this point. The difference is the pure number of complaints compared too Ben's. I'm at a loss for words how anyone can say that 24 cases of alleged sexual abuse and harassment by a player is less serious than 1 case of alleged rape that was never charged.
In Goodell's letter to Roethlisberger on his suspension:
"The Personal Conduct Policy makes clear that I may impose discipline 'even where the conduct does not result in conviction of a crime' as, for example, where the conduct 'imposes inherent danger to the safety and well-being of another person,' " Goodell stated in his letter to Roethlisberger.
"As the District Attorney concluded, the extensive investigatory record shows that you contributed to the irresponsible consumption of alcohol by purchasing [or facilitating the purchase of] alcoholic beverages for underage college students, at least some of whom were likely already intoxicated. There is no question that the excessive consumption of alcohol that evening put the students and yourself at risk. The Personal Conduct Policy also states that discipline is appropriate for conduct that 'undermines or puts at risk the integrity and reputation of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL players.' By any measure, your conduct satisfies that standard."
"I recognize that the allegations in Georgia were disputed and that they did not result in criminal charges being filed against you. My decision today is not based on a finding that you violated Georgia law, or on a conclusion that differs from that of the local prosecutor. That said, you are held to a higher standard as an NFL player, and there is nothing about your conduct in Milledgeville that can remotely be described as admirable, responsible, or consistent with either the values of the league or the expectations of our fans."
"Your conduct raises sufficient concerns that I believe effective intervention now is the best step for your personal and professional welfare."
"I believe it is essential that you take full advantage of the resources available to you. My ultimate disposition in this matter will be influenced by the extent to which you do so, what you learn as a result, and a demonstrated commitment to making positive change in your life."
"In your six years in the NFL, you have first thrilled and now disappointed a great many people. I urge you to take full advantage of this opportunity to get your life and career back on track."
The most important part of that letter as it would pertain to Watson is: That said, you are held to a higher standard as an NFL player, and there is nothing about your conduct in Milledgeville that can remotely be described as admirable, responsible, or consistent with either the values of the league or the expectations of our fans."
It doesn't matter which side of the coin you fall on with the Watson situation because it would be hard to sell that it was ok for Watson to seek out what is rumored to be over 100 different women over a 17-month period where the vast majority of those women were not licensed or certified in the profession of Massage Therapy. 24 and counting of those interactions have alleged sexual misconduct of which Watson has settled with 20 thus far. The settlements do not denote innocence or guilt but can't remotely be described as admirable, responsible, or consistent with either the values of the league or the expectations of the fans.
The indefinite suspension the NFL is seeking does not have anything to do with the lack of criminal charges, but it does have to do with discipline being appropriate due to the unprecedent number of complaints and the conduct of Watson that "undermines or puts at risk the integrity and reputation of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL players. The additional civil suit against the Texans has now broaden that conclusion since now Watson's actions have also put at risk the integrity and reputation of the NFL club, the Houston Texans.
I may be wrong, but the scope of this situation is unprecedented and the suspension should be likewise. Watson's actions may not have been criminal but if your truthful with yourself, these are not the actions of a person who is without fault.
I deleted the snarky part so as to address the actual question....
Let me explain what you are basing your question on first. This report came from some anonymous source who "claimed" that he had some first hand knowledge this was true. I have addressed this several times. But just for you I'll address it again. Firstly there is no way to verify the source. Secondly as we have seen on this very board what some people see as coercion others do not. What some people see as evidence others do not. This is nothing more than one persons opinion of what was presented and those who support watson have run with it as though it's factual.
That first part wasn't snark. To be fair, most of the stuff before and some of the stuff after was snark, but not that part.
Dude, most everything we're getting (especially in terms of the NFL discipline) has been anonymous source. There's no way to verify any of these sources. Hell, this whole saga kicked off with allegations that have little (if any) corroborating evidence. To start nitpicking this now is weak.
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
And yes, the NFL may have had those facts, but if the settlement included those records being sealed nothing contained in those records could be used. And yet you continue to repeat a false statement. Hardin was also trying the case in the court of public opinion. He just wasn't as good at it. If you actually believe he and watson weren't I can show you many statements put out by both Hardin and watson to try and sway public opinion.
This wasn't a court of public opinion move on the part of Hardin. It would have been a legal move to circumvent all the facts of the case being looked at in the NFL hearing. A very smart and shrewd legal move none the less.
If the NFL had the facts from their own investigation, does a settlement (with an assumed confidentiality or gag order stipulation) suddenly prevent NFL from using those facts (knowing the NFL discipline isn't any sort of legal process)? I honestly don't know. It's an interesting discussion, IMO.
Buzbee came out with a full battleplan in terms of public opinion. Hardin did not, and only tried to respond when they were already getting their butts handed to them. Trying to put the 2 on equal footing is misleading.
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.
It was the comment about loving Mangini because I think the roster needs to be squeaky clean. We know that's nothing close to these accusations.
You seem to be trying to use a first hand account of actual events in this case to a third person opinion of what the evidence did and didn't convey. Those certainly aren't the same thing. As I've said, we see on this very board how opinions vary on what is or isn't coercion. What is or isn't considered evidence. What people are promoting is a persons opinion that agrees with their own. I certainly have not said that the person who reported that isn't giving an honest opinion of what they believes the evidence conveyed even if we really have no idea about that. All I'm questioning is if their opinion lines up with what the retired judge in the case thinks of the same evidence provided.
An opinion drawn of testimony isn't conclusive or factual. It's an opinion.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
First of all it is not 24 cases of "sexual abuse". The claim is sexual misconduct/indecent exposure and that his genitals touched them without their consent...Let's at least be correct about the allegations...And 20 of the allegations are gone...and regardless if something happened...or if nothing really happened...those allegations are no more. And as such there are ZERO "facts" and only hearsay about what happened in those 20 instances. If you want to believe what amounts to rumors (as nothing was proven) That is completely your right...But I personally try not to jump to conclusions without some facts...
Secondly lets not pretend that those allegations against Watson are even CLOSE to rape. Terrible, disgusting, yes...But not even close to rape.
Thirdly, Yes it is true the allegation of rape was not upheld against Ben....BUT what wasn't an allegation and was corroborated by witnesses is that Ben did take the Girl into the bathroom and had his body guards stand outside the door. There is a difference. SO when Goodell is speaking to his actions it is to what was confirmed and not alleged (or at least should be). I believe, there were other witnesses talking about his actions before heading into and after exiting the bathroom. These are witness testimonies by people not associated by the acts that were alleged. The only witnesses in Watsons case are the accusers...so it is a case of he said she said...and the only witness outside the accusers that we know of is a son who said his mom was bragging about massaging Watson and only changed her tune when the negative stuff came out and even offered her son a bribe to keep his mouth shut...(hearsay as well and not one of the 24)
These are 2 different situations...
Now with that said...
Quote
Yet those same people supporting Watson's issues as being innocent until proved guilty have no problem calling Bub Been a rapist without ever being charged.
Who are these people? The only thing I have seen in these discussions concerning Ben from those who either support Watson or are waiting to make judgement is concerning the punishment...6 games down to 4...compared to a whole season and possibly more for Watson.
And just like you have a prerogative to believe the accusers, others have the same right to believe Watson...they also have a right to not believe Ben at the same time...(not saying I do just pointing it out)
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????
Sure, you can believe that 24 women are lying and only watson is telling the truth. I mean that doesn't make a lot of sense but you most certainly can.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
I was running on the assumption that all the powers that be were on the same page on what is and isn't coercion (though the transcript from the interview with the investigator is evidence to the contrary). "No evidence" is a pretty strong, black-and-white statement. I'd be a little surprised (and a lot disappointed) if such an intensely reported leak was based on just a weird take (though I guess we've seen worse).
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.
Nothing indicates the person who gave this opinion was one of the "powers that be". If it was it should never have been said in the first place. And you're probably right that the phrase "no evidence" wasn't the correct term to use. I think possibly the gravity of the evidence would have been better.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
That nugget was put out there by his source along with the statement that NFL interviewed 12 women and focused on 5, that the NFL was seeking 'unprecedented' punishment. I haven't noticed any of those other statements being questioned. Florio was one of the leaders beating the drum to suspend Watson into oblivion and never before have you questioned his takes or his sources.
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.
First of all it is not 24 cases of "sexual abuse". The claim is sexual misconduct/indecent exposure and that his genitals touched them without their consent...Let's at least be correct about the allegations...And 20 of the allegations are gone...and regardless if something happened...or if nothing really happened...those allegations are no more. And as such there are ZERO "facts" and only hearsay about what happened in those 20 instances. If you want to believe what amounts to rumors (as nothing was proven) That is completely your right...But I personally try not to jump to conclusions without some facts...
Secondly lets not pretend that those allegations against Watson are even CLOSE to rape. Terrible, disgusting, yes...But not even close to rape.
Thirdly, Yes it is true the allegation of rape was not upheld against Ben....BUT what wasn't an allegation and was corroborated by witnesses is that Ben did take the Girl into the bathroom and had his body guards stand outside the door. There is a difference. SO when Goodell is speaking to his actions it is to what was confirmed and not alleged (or at least should be). I believe, there were other witnesses talking about his actions before heading into and after exiting the bathroom. These are witness testimonies by people not associated by the acts that were alleged. The only witnesses in Watsons case are the accusers...so it is a case of he said she said...and the only witness outside the accusers that we know of is a son who said his mom was bragging about massaging Watson and only changed her tune when the negative stuff came out and even offered her son a bribe to keep his mouth shut...(hearsay as well and not one of the 24)
These are 2 different situations...
Now with that said...
Quote
Yet those same people supporting Watson's issues as being innocent until proved guilty have no problem calling Bub Been a rapist without ever being charged.
Who are these people? The only thing I have seen in these discussions concerning Ben from those who either support Watson or are waiting to make judgement is concerning the punishment...6 games down to 4...compared to a whole season and possibly more for Watson.
And just like you have a prerogative to believe the accusers, others have the same right to believe Watson...they also have a right to not believe Ben at the same time...(not saying I do just pointing it out)
As has progressed on this board, the 20 cases may be closed to further civil claims but the fact that they did file the suits remain. Just because the suits are no longer active does not take away from the fact that they were filed, and Watson settled to avoid the trials. Not unlike Roethlisberger, though not charged, the activity within the encounter is still a matter of record. In this case as well as Ben's, the NFL is not disputing the innocence or guilt of the matter, the NFL is taking exception to the overall activities that brought them to is point. The NYTimes reported that they verified at least 66 women were involved and it could be as many as over 100. To think or even imagine that a person can simply pay off their accusers and the whole matter becomes mute is a ridiculous claim.
Texas Law and Sexual Assault You will find the legal definitions for various types of sexual assault in the Texas Penal Code Section 22.011(a)(2)(A). In Texas, sexual assault is defined as the intentional penetration of a victim’s sex organ, anus, or mouth without their consent. You can likewise be charged with sexual assault if you cause the victim’s sex organ to penetrate your body without their consent. According to the NYTimes: Only two of the cases included claims of sexual assault: Watson was said in both cases to have pressured women to perform oral sex during massages and was accused in one of also having grabbed a woman’s buttocks and vagina. The civil suits alleged that Watson engaged in a pattern of lewd behavior with women hired to provide personal services, coercing them to touch him in a sexual manner, exposing himself to women he had hired for massages, or moving his body in ways that forced them to touch his penis. The incidents cited in the suits were said to have occurred from March 2020 to March 2021.
That my friend a) proves that Watson was alleged to have committed sexual assault and b) according to Texas Law, sexual assault is defined as the intentional penetration of a victim's sex organ, anus, or mouth without their consent. Just like Big Ben, the GJ didn't believe there was enough evidence to bring criminal charges yet none the less, forced oral sex is just as criminal as rape in Texas and both are equally terrible and disgusting. On another note, if Watson is innocent, what was "terrible and disgusting" that he did as you stated?
According to the above, the civil suits against Watson allege 2 sexual assaults (same weight as rape in Texas) and 24 sexual misconducts including coercive and lewd sexual behavior. Watson's alleged acts are every bit as serious as Big Ben's and in fact much more serious since not only are there 2 alleged sexual assaults (double Roethlisberger) but 24 additional alleged sexual misconduct claims.
This is not a situation as to who you believe or not, it's a situation where Watson has been accused of much more serious crimes than Roethlisberger ever was under Texas Law. My point has always been that Watson's issues are unprecedented for a player from the NFL. Trying to compare what Ben was accused of to what Watson is accused of is like comparing a grape to a watermelon. Both allegations are bad in the worse sense but Big Ben's alleged claim pales in comparison to what Watson has been alleged to have done. As much as people want to give Watson a free pass, this guy is a bad dude and hopefully the Judge Robinson and the NFL treats it as such.
It's only a witch hunt if you believe that the women are lying and watson is telling the truth. But to the extent that I don't care nearly as much if hardly at all about players of other teams verses the one I've followed and been a loyal fan of for over 50 years, you're right. I have no vested interest in them.
Here's something I think everyone should consider. If it holds validity it's an impressive and very strategic legal move on the behalf of watson and his legal team.
The settlement of the 20 lawsuits was reported on June 21'st. The NFL hearings began on June 25th. Many such settlements include sealing the evidence and placing a gag order concerning those cases. As such it could be that the NFL is not permitted to use those cases as a part of any of their hearings. There would be no documents or evidence that could be used concerning those cases. Food for thought.
Sometimes timing is everything. Let me guess, the settlements coming just four days before the NFL hearings is merely a coincidence?
Actually Judge Robinson was named back in March of 2022 and the investigation began sometime in May. The final hearing on the investigation began June 27th. By that time, the NFL already had a lot of the information they were using in the investigation. They spoke to at least 12 accusers, so I am assuming that occurred prior to the 20 settlements. I don't know how they would be gagged against using the information in their investigation for punishment by the league. It isn't a legal case, it is an internal punishment. I don't think they were asked to return any information they received prior to the settlements.
As much as people want to give Watson a free pass, this guy is a bad dude and hopefully the Judge Robinson and the NFL treats it as such.
As much as people want Watson to be punished and label him as rapey, a predator, a sexual deviant, etc.......he has never been charged or convicted of a crime. I hope Judge Robinson is fair as the NFL's independent officer when she rules on this case and not succumb to public pressure from the mob.
Sure, you can believe that 24 women are lying and only watson is telling the truth. I mean that doesn't make a lot of sense but you most certainly can.
As much as people want to give Watson a free pass, this guy is a bad dude and hopefully the Judge Robinson and the NFL treats it as such.
As much as people want Watson to be punished and label him as rapey, a predator, a sexual deviant, etc.......he has never been charged or convicted of a crime. I hope Judge Robinson is fair as the NFL's independent officer when she rules on this case and not succumb to public pressure from the mob.
Dude, when are you going to get it that the NFL isn't concerned about the "lack of criminal charges" you keep hanging your hat on in every post? The NFL and Judge Robinson is not basing their decision on a suspension that Watson did or didn't violate Texas law, or on a conclusion that differs from that of the local prosecutor. They are considering suspending Watson because he's held to a higher standard as an NFL player, and there is nothing about his conduct in Houston with 2 alleged sexual assaults and 24 alleged sexual misconduct claims that can remotely be described as admirable, responsible, or consistent with either the values of the league or the expectations of the fans.
You have the god given right to totally ignore the unprecedented number of alleged claims against Watson, but I also have the god given right to question his motives of what's been reported of seeking out over 100 different women in a 17-month period with 25% of those women alleging sexual assault and sexual misconduct. I can understand your disdain for anyone questioning Watson's integrity because football is the end of all means for you. Maybe you could take a similar stand and allow us who believe that 2 alleged sexual assaults (same as rape in the State of Texas) and 24 alleged sexual misconducts are serious enough to be addressed by the NFL because it's damaging the integrity of the game.
Maybe I have this wrong. But from my understanding from a number of published sources "no force, violence, or coercion.
"Watson has faced as many as 24 civil lawsuits from women accusing him of various forms of sexual harassment or assault, with 20 of those recently being settled out of court and four still going through the legal system. Florio cites a source claiming NFL investigators interviewed 12 of those women (later zeroing in on five cases) and found "no evidence that Watson engaged in violence, made threats, applied coercion, or used force."
I understand it better than you do. I actually did a ton of research and was the first one to post all the info on the Personal Conduct policy. I understand how it works and that is why I brought up the discrepancy of how the owners have been treated for violating the PCP. We keep going round and round. Nothing changes.
I was simply responding to your crap about Watson being a bad dude and that you hope Robinson sees it as such. Nothing more. Nothing less.
In 2006. LeCharles Bentley, once described as a "real people mover at Center" signed a big dollar deal to play OC for the Browns, and tore a tendon on the first play of camp, and never suited up for the Browns iirc. But they didn't pay him big dollars to not be the starter.
In 200? Stalworth? Got suspended for a year for a DUI that involved a death, iirc.
In 2007 ish? Joe Jurivicious, signed a SIX YEAR DEAL with the Browns, (whoopee, yippee, we were going to have a decent player for 6 years, ... about less than a year later, he Quit football. iirc.
The Browns drafted, Kellon Winslow Jr. at TE, and boy, in the National championship game of college nobody could cover him, and he got Hurt for a year, on a kickoff, onside kick. and then when the year was waited out, he got hurt for another year because he fell off a super motorcycle he'd just got and , so 2 years.
got distracted. The List of Browns 1st round picks who have missed a whole year due to injury is almost as long as the qb's list on the jersey. Then, M. Garrett got a 1/2 year susp. for putting Rudolphs helmet back on his head. Kareem Hunt got suspended for 1/2 a year when he first came to the Browns iirc. and Justin Gilbert was a Browns 1st round pick who barely made the freaking roster, so we are used to, seeing the latest hope, not work out and then the Browns move on to new. Romeo Crennell, got a contract extension as the Browns head coach, and it only lasted one more year.
So we're used to seeing whatever it is we see suit up for the Browns.
Can Deshaun Watson play better for the Browns, than Baker Mayfield would have? ... Now the Games count.
Maybe I have this wrong. But from my understanding from a number of published sources "no force, violence, or coercion.
"Watson has faced as many as 24 civil lawsuits from women accusing him of various forms of sexual harassment or assault, with 20 of those recently being settled out of court and four still going through the legal system. Florio cites a source claiming NFL investigators interviewed 12 of those women (later zeroing in on five cases) and found "no evidence that Watson engaged in violence, made threats, applied coercion, or used force."
What do I have wrong?
I would not say you're wrong, I'd say we are all dependent on what we read and whether the author is bias or not - 3rd hand hearsay is questionable at best. Not saying it's wrong, just pointing out that it's 3rd hand. What I do know is that Buzbee said 2 of his clients filed civil suits alleging sexual abuse and sexual misconduct. The sexual abuse was in regards to their claim that Watson forced himself upon them for oral sex. In the Stae of Texas, forced oral sex as well as rape and forced anal all fall under the Sexual Abuse clause. Also, the 20 settlement cases were said by Buzbee to be alleged sexual misconduct suits. If true, then the alleged sexual abuse suits are still valid, and I would question how an NFL investigator could ever make the determination that there was no evidence that Watson engaged in violence, made threats, applied coercion, or used force in a he said/she said situation. I would also find it very suspect that an NFL Investigator would be confiding in a 3rd party during an on-going investigation.
Believe what you want but I'm reserving judgement until I hear from Judge Robinson on the basics of her decision-making process.
As much as people want to give Watson a free pass, this guy is a bad dude and hopefully the Judge Robinson and the NFL treats it as such.
As much as people want Watson to be punished and label him as rapey, a predator, a sexual deviant, etc.......he has never been charged or convicted of a crime. I hope Judge Robinson is fair as the NFL's independent officer when she rules on this case and not succumb to public pressure from the mob.
Well, we "hope" for different things. I've never labeled him as rapey... if that is even a thing. But, if he used his influence as a sports star to believe it is ok to do as little as flashing multiple women, I'm not ok with that. It isn't ok to go into someone's workplace and flash your junk, EVEN IF that workplace uses a towel over said junk regularly. You don't hear of towel issues as a regularity, but for some reason.. I know, it was probably the wind, right?... Watson's always falls off "inadvertently". That is NOT ok. It isn't rape, but it isn't some small token of skating on the edge of decency either. If a guy walks down the street and grabs his crotch and says to a woman "You want a piece of this?" It is considered sexual harassment. What he did is indecency at it's root, some of the allegations are far worse. No, I agree... NOT RAPE... we get it, but where you line in decency lies seems to be a bit blurred. That is the question we all have to ask ourselves. I think I have made my line pretty clear and you have made your line pretty clear in what we consider "OK" on the decency line. I would venture to say everyone else is somewhere in between you and I. His own lawyer stated that it is not illegal to get a happy ending at a massage... Well, for one, I don't know any states except Nevada where they are legal.. To my knowledge none of these occurrences were in Nevada. So, if you weren't in Nevada and especially at one of "those" establishments in Nevada, you cannot assume ANY OTHER message therapist performs these lewd acts. There is something wrong with you if you do..again, this is my opinion and obviously not yours.
If you don't take offense to someone expecting something other than therapy when commissioning a massage, then you might be a pervert too.
I believe that I have been consistent about wanting to wait for a decision from those who have seen everything that is known.
You refer to the state of Texas. Two grand juries behind closed doors listened to six hours of testimony and all known evidence presented.
Their decision was not to indict.
Based upon what you have posted before are you really "reserving judgement until I hear from Judge Robinson on the basics of her decision-making process?"
I am not trying to start something. It just appears that everything you post is slanted toward Watson being guilty.
I believe that I have been consistent about wanting to wait for a decision from those who have seen everything that is known.
You refer to the state of Texas. Two grand juries behind closed doors listened to six hours of testimony and all known evidence presented.
Their decision was not to indict.
Based upon what you have posted before are you really "reserving judgement until I hear from Judge Robinson on the basics of her decision-making process?"
I am not trying to start something. It just appears that everything you post is slanted toward Watson being guilty.
I think you have been pretty reasonable and consistent in your approach.
As has progressed on this board, the 20 cases may be closed to further civil claims but the fact that they did file the suits remain. Just because the suits are no longer active does not take away from the fact that they were filed, and Watson settled to avoid the trials. Not unlike Roethlisberger, though not charged, the activity within the encounter is still a matter of record. In this case as well as Ben's, the NFL is not disputing the innocence or guilt of the matter, the NFL is taking exception to the overall activities that brought them to is point. The NYTimes reported that they verified at least 66 women were involved and it could be as many as over 100. To think or even imagine that a person can simply pay off their accusers and the whole matter becomes mute is a ridiculous claim.
Texas Law and Sexual Assault You will find the legal definitions for various types of sexual assault in the Texas Penal Code Section 22.011(a)(2)(A). In Texas, sexual assault is defined as the intentional penetration of a victim’s sex organ, anus, or mouth without their consent. You can likewise be charged with sexual assault if you cause the victim’s sex organ to penetrate your body without their consent. According to the NYTimes: Only two of the cases included claims of sexual assault: Watson was said in both cases to have pressured women to perform oral sex during massages and was accused in one of also having grabbed a woman’s buttocks and vagina. The civil suits alleged that Watson engaged in a pattern of lewd behavior with women hired to provide personal services, coercing them to touch him in a sexual manner, exposing himself to women he had hired for massages, or moving his body in ways that forced them to touch his penis. The incidents cited in the suits were said to have occurred from March 2020 to March 2021.
That my friend a) proves that Watson was alleged to have committed sexual assault and b) according to Texas Law, sexual assault is defined as the intentional penetration of a victim's sex organ, anus, or mouth without their consent. Just like Big Ben, the GJ didn't believe there was enough evidence to bring criminal charges yet none the less, forced oral sex is just as criminal as rape in Texas and both are equally terrible and disgusting. On another note, if Watson is innocent, what was "terrible and disgusting" that he did as you stated?
Actually, I think the issue is that he paid them and they did it consensually. (examples were shown given via texts messages him rebooking with them, and their friends or family members stories these women shared with the family members or friends).
So, it actually turns into more of a prostitution case and all of these women are guaranteed jail sentences if it goes to court.
That's why all of them have to settle and it's a much more challenging case for the NFL to sift through.
If you don't take offense to someone expecting something other than therapy when commissioning a massage, then you might be a pervert too.
That's it. I let the "psychotic" comment go on another thread. In the past few weeks, we have disagreed on certain topics. I actually praised you for disagreeing w/out the personal attacks. However, comments labels such as "psychotic" and and "pervert" are unacceptable. I am ending discourse w/you.
In the end I don't know what justice is in this case. What we know is there is no criminal charge.
Civil cases have not yet been heard. 20 cases settled. In the end the civil cases are about monetary compensation not innocence or guilt.
The suspension if there is one has nothing to do about justice. It is a hired arbitrator who will decide if a code of behavior has been violated not a crime.
Lots of grey in this whole thing. So, we await a decision from this person who the NFL and NFLPA agreed upon.
At this point that is the best we will get. All of our opinions are just that.
I just watched this. I don't know if it adds anything. He did say the judge will look at this like a civil case where "preponderance of evidence" can be applied.
Preponderance of the evidence is one type of evidentiary standard used in a burden of proof analysis. Under the preponderance standard, the burden of proof is met when the party with the burden convinces the fact finder that there is a greater than 50% chance that the claim is true.
There is a very real chance that Sue Robinson says there is no suspension. Maybe a fine?
As the guy in the video was saying, things could go badly for Watson should Robinson impose a two-game suspension [just throwing a small number out there for hypothetical purposes.] Goodell, or his designee, could lengthen the suspension.
The intriguing part of this is on whether or not the NFL takes the NFLPA's threat [led by Kessler] of suing the NFL for biased and unfair punishments for those that violate the Personal Conduct Policy. And again, I am speaking of the discrepancies of how the owners have been judged vs the players.
