Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 11 1 2 3 4 10 11
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
Well yeah, he was creepy.


Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,601
Likes: 584
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,601
Likes: 584
Originally Posted by PrplPplEater
Originally Posted by mgh888
Originally Posted by Ballpeen
Nobody is ignoring the findings. She levied her opinion and set a 6 game suspension.

That is all one really needs to know.

As the only person to have heard the evidence, as an experienced Judge - Sue Robinson's "opinion" that Watson acted as a sexual predator (you can't act like a predator without being one btw) - that he lied, that he's shown no remorse, that some,many, most or all of the allegations against him were founded .... that all matters.

The 6 games is the result

This is correct and unequivocal.
She also would have given a lengthier suspension, but couldn't because it appears that she is actually trying to do her job well and is using precedence already set.


Is anybody even debating all of this? It's in some pretty clear writing directly from her. It'd be fairly difficult to misunderstand what she wrote as she was very articulate.
I mean.... what, exactly, is everyone arguing about anymore? Does anyone even know?

My take is that some / many are trying to simply move on - accept a 6 game ban and then try to minimize what Sue Robinson actually found DW guilty of (and drown out anyone who wants to comment or talk about what she said in her ruling/findings). There are many statements from Sue Robinson that indicate Watson is so much worse than just "creepy" - and he's the QB and face of the Browns. I think it's important. Others don't want to acknowledge it - we're even back to comments about the grand jury as if that means something (which it doesn't at this point).


The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
What it's come down to is if they actually admit the findings are accurate and what they say is true, they have to admit to what they have been and continue to defend. They would have to admit the actuality of what they will be supporting moving forward. I can understand how and why they would resist that.

Trying to minimize and refusing to admit what the actual findings say is the only path they've left themselves with at this point.


Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 825
Likes: 27
O
All Pro
Offline
All Pro
O
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 825
Likes: 27
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by OrangeCrush
Like I said before, Watson is a creep.

And still it continues. Judge Robinson found him to be guilty of sexual assault and some people are still saying what a judge found to be sexual assault is only creepy. Sad, just sad.

She found him guilty of sexual assault as defined by the NFL on the day of the hearing. That is correct.

Another form of "sexual assault" as defined by the NFL: Accidentally brushing up against a woman's butt or chest while exiting a crowded elevator.

Obviously, what Watson did was more serious than that, just as other forms of "sexual assault" are more serious than what Sue found Watson guilty of doing.

To paint a picture of "all sexual assault is the same" is very disingenuous. Sue also makes this distinction in her report, as she notes violent and non-violent sexual assault. She said it was indisputable that Watson actions did not fall into the violent category.

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,403
Likes: 140
M
mac Offline
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,403
Likes: 140
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Originally Posted by Ballpeen
Nobody is ignoring the findings. She levied her opinion and set a 6 game suspension.

That is all one really needs to know.

Agreed. The opinion was levied by the judge. Almost universally, people said they preferred her ruling on this rather than Goodell. I thought 6 games was excessive, but I completely accept her decision. Now, we have folks who aren't willing to accept the decision of a female judge and are lobbying for Goodell to overrule that female judge and increase Watson's punishment.


Doesn't matter what Robinson ruled...there is one more step in the process to go...what Goodell says..!

"Almost universal"...preferring judge's decision...simply not true..! What do women think about Robinson's ruling..?

Vers...you may not like the "NFL's process"....but we must wait on the final decision in the process.




Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
So by calling watson a creep you mean that non violent sexual assault is only creepy? I didn't say that all sexual assaults are the same. I've actually quoted what the NFL definition was word for word which is what she found him guilty of.

My assertion is that when you minimize such conduct by describing it as "creepy" that's just sad. I stand by that.


Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,203
Likes: 586
O
Legend
Offline
Legend
O
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,203
Likes: 586
Are you really going to jump down his throat because he used the word creepy? Did you not read the rest of his post? He also used the word 'repulsive'.


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

-PrplPplEater
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,203
Likes: 586
O
Legend
Offline
Legend
O
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,203
Likes: 586
There's another way to look at that as well. According to some of the summaries, Robinson used the same threshold as what would be used in a civil trial. So the assumption is that if Watson's civil cases ever went to trial, he'd probably be found guilty (at least in 4 of the cases).


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

-PrplPplEater
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
So repulsively creepy? You either call it what it is or you don't. It was sexual assault carried out in a predatory fashion. That was the ruling. Dancing around that is exactly what we've been seeing and this example was no different.


Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,912
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,912
Likes: 1778
Originally Posted by oobernoober
There's another way to look at that as well. According to some of the summaries, Robinson used the same threshold as what would be used in a civil trial. So the assumption is that if Watson's civil cases ever went to trial, he'd probably be found guilty (at least in 4 of the cases).

I'd argue that you're unfairly leaping past the point that all language was defined by the NFL, and the judge was bound by their "post-hoc definitions". That would be a pretty early box on the flowchart that may prevent predicting what would happen in a court of law. Is it possible his actions would even reach a level of "sexual assault" in many venues?


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,203
Likes: 586
O
Legend
Offline
Legend
O
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,203
Likes: 586
Again, read his post. He wasn't dancing.


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

-PrplPplEater
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
Depends on the location as laws vary from location to location. But in a civil trial sexual assault would not have to be proven for the victims to receive a judgement. That bar far exceeds what would have been needed.


Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
Originally Posted by oobernoober
Again, read his post.


I did. Nowhere in that post did he say watson's actions were sexual assault.

Last edited by PitDAWG; 08/03/22 03:04 PM.

Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,469
Likes: 794
B
Legend
Offline
Legend
B
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,469
Likes: 794
Originally Posted by mac
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Originally Posted by Ballpeen
Nobody is ignoring the findings. She levied her opinion and set a 6 game suspension.

That is all one really needs to know.

Agreed. The opinion was levied by the judge. Almost universally, people said they preferred her ruling on this rather than Goodell. I thought 6 games was excessive, but I completely accept her decision. Now, we have folks who aren't willing to accept the decision of a female judge and are lobbying for Goodell to overrule that female judge and increase Watson's punishment.


Doesn't matter what Robinson ruled...there is one more step in the process to go...what Goodell says..!

"Almost universal"...preferring judge's decision...simply not true..! What do women think about Robinson's ruling..?

Vers...you may not like the "NFL's process"....but we must wait on the final decision in the process.

As as has been pointed out in the ruling, public opinion shouldn't matter because the NFL has ruled that way in the past and been very inconsistent in their punishments by making up rules as they go.

I don't mean for this to be cold or insensitive, but it doesn't matter what women think, or you, or I. You have to stick with the rules in place. You can't just change them at will to win some opinion poll.


If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.

GM Strong




[Linked Image]
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
I don't really disagree with you. I will say it seems odd for Robinson to say this offense was unprecedented and then say she decided to stick with precedent. Those two things don't sound logical when you put them together.


Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,553
Likes: 586
D
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,553
Likes: 586
Just a point of clarification to address my nit-noid OCD:

"Guilty" - Criminal Court of Law
"Liable" - Civil Court of Law


Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown

#gmstrong
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 825
Likes: 27
O
All Pro
Offline
All Pro
O
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 825
Likes: 27
Originally Posted by oobernoober
Again, read his post. He wasn't dancing.

Dude, he only reads what he wants to read into things. My second post on this thread literally says he was found guilty of sexual assault.

My main point is that sexual assault is not a good term to use when it can mean anything from pinching someone's butt to forcible rape.

1 member likes this: oobernoober
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,912
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,912
Likes: 1778
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Depends on the location as laws vary from location to location. But in a civil trial sexual assault would not have to be proven for the victims to receive a judgement. That bar far exceeds what would have been needed.

Agreed, and good point. In that case wouldn't it just be a judgement without the finding of guilt? Isn't the criteria there "most likely" rather than "beyond reasonable doubt"?

I just think it's hard to compare the two venues and assume because he was found guilty; by what is basically an arbitrator in a corporate case; the same would hold true in a court of law.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
Originally Posted by OrangeCrush
My main point is that sexual assault is not a good term to use when it can mean anything from pinching someone's butt to forcible rape.

In this case what sexual assault was considered was clearly defined. It couldn't have meant "anything".


Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,912
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,912
Likes: 1778
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
I don't really disagree with you. I will say it seems odd for Robinson to say this offense was unprecedented and then say she decided to stick with precedent. Those two things don't sound logical when you put them together.

If you liken it to an actual court of law, a judge would still be bound by sentencing guidelines.

Robinson is basically dealing with contract law in this case. She's pointed out that their punishment guidelines aren't clear enough for a more severe sentence... and that the NFL was trying to define and impose them after the fact.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,800
Likes: 267
L
Legend
Offline
Legend
L
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,800
Likes: 267
Originally Posted by Ballpeen
Nobody is ignoring the findings. She levied her opinion and set a 6 game suspension.

That is all one really needs to know.

His being pragmatic is what I’ve always liked about peen.

Last edited by lampdogg; 08/03/22 03:28 PM.

[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]

gmstrong

-----------------

2023: The year we got a legit D.
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,601
Likes: 584
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,601
Likes: 584
Originally Posted by FATE
Originally Posted by oobernoober
There's another way to look at that as well. According to some of the summaries, Robinson used the same threshold as what would be used in a civil trial. So the assumption is that if Watson's civil cases ever went to trial, he'd probably be found guilty (at least in 4 of the cases).

I'd argue that you're unfairly leaping past the point that all language was defined by the NFL, and the judge was bound by their "post-hoc definitions". That would be a pretty early box on the flowchart that may prevent predicting what would happen in a court of law. Is it possible his actions would even reach a level of "sexual assault" in many venues?

Just my opinion - but I think it's more than reasonable that Robinson would not have included the language about Watson (possibly) deserving a harsher judgement - but that the letter of NFL policy and precedent (seems to have) prevented her from handing out a stiffer penalty..... Unless she felt that Watson's actions did indeed go beyond the level of 'Assault' in a civil court. Sue Robinson was pretty damning with what she said about Watson, I don't think she based that criticism only on a low threshold of NFL policy ... where the policy impacted her decision, ruling and findings she seemed to spell that out.


The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,545
Likes: 121
D
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
D
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,545
Likes: 121
Originally Posted by mgh888
Originally Posted by PrplPplEater
Originally Posted by mgh888
Originally Posted by Ballpeen
Nobody is ignoring the findings. She levied her opinion and set a 6 game suspension.

That is all one really needs to know.

As the only person to have heard the evidence, as an experienced Judge - Sue Robinson's "opinion" that Watson acted as a sexual predator (you can't act like a predator without being one btw) - that he lied, that he's shown no remorse, that some,many, most or all of the allegations against him were founded .... that all matters.

The 6 games is the result

This is correct and unequivocal.
She also would have given a lengthier suspension, but couldn't because it appears that she is actually trying to do her job well and is using precedence already set.


Is anybody even debating all of this? It's in some pretty clear writing directly from her. It'd be fairly difficult to misunderstand what she wrote as she was very articulate.
I mean.... what, exactly, is everyone arguing about anymore? Does anyone even know?

My take is that some / many are trying to simply move on - accept a 6 game ban and then try to minimize what Sue Robinson actually found DW guilty of (and drown out anyone who wants to comment or talk about what she said in her ruling/findings). There are many statements from Sue Robinson that indicate Watson is so much worse than just "creepy" - and he's the QB and face of the Browns. I think it's important. Others don't want to acknowledge it - we're even back to comments about the grand jury as if that means something (which it doesn't at this point).

So just when do you move on? If his final punishment is a 6 game suspension and he serves that punishment then yes at that time it should be over. He will more than likely settle the last unresolved civil case, the NFL punishment would then be over, and there are no criminal charges. Just when does this end? Somewhere after a person fulfills their punishment, forgiveness must take place. I did not say you, I, we, must forget what happened. But, there does come a time that forgiveness needs to take place. Especially, after a person fulfills the term of their punishment.


Romans 10:9 "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thy heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,601
Likes: 584
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,601
Likes: 584
Clearly - but less than a few days after the decision, and before the NFL has decided whether or not to proceed with appealing the penalty is WAY WAY too soon for folks to be drowning out others opinion and telling everyone to hush and move along.

Last edited by mgh888; 08/03/22 03:33 PM.

The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 825
Likes: 27
O
All Pro
Offline
All Pro
O
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 825
Likes: 27
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Originally Posted by OrangeCrush
My main point is that sexual assault is not a good term to use when it can mean anything from pinching someone's butt to forcible rape.

In this case what sexual assault was considered was clearly defined. It couldn't have meant "anything".

Everything I posted fits the definition of sexual assault as defined in this case. If one of my 2 examples does not fit definition, please say which one.

Everything I stated in that post is truthful.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
I think using the term a court of law is an attempt to discount the findings in this case. She also said he had lied throughout. That would mean he's also been committing perjury all along. If anyone actually looks at all of her findings in totality, the case against him is devastating.

And you are certainly right about the difference in the threshold required to find guilt between a criminal and civil case. But everyone knows that when there are only two people involved and it's illegal to film massage therapy, you aren't going to have 8x10 glossy photographs and video footage.

In a case such as this you have an experienced judge who looked at what I've seen reported as thousands of pages of evidence and three days of testimony. Through all of this she determined that watson is a liar. He conducted predatory actions in a manner that ended up resulting in sexual assault. That's a pretty damning conclusion and seems she clearly understands what she was reading and the testimony in front of her. Not pointing this towards you but it seems many who never saw or heard the testimony, never been a judge nor looked into the validity and reputation of this judge wish to try to find any way possible to diminish or undermine her findings.

I could understand people questioning it if it were something that sounded like even a close call. If she had waffled and not found him to have been guilty of all three of the NFL's complaints. But that's not the case here. Not only did she find him guilty on all three of the NFL's complaints, she also made a point to write in her decision that watson was a liar, had no remorse, that his actions were so egregious they were unprecedented. That's certainly not a close call by anyone's definition.


Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
1 member likes this: FATE
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,553
Likes: 586
D
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,553
Likes: 586
Originally Posted by FATE
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
I don't really disagree with you. I will say it seems odd for Robinson to say this offense was unprecedented and then say she decided to stick with precedent. Those two things don't sound logical when you put them together.

If you liken it to an actual court of law, a judge would still be bound by sentencing guidelines.

Robinson is basically dealing with contract law in this case. She's pointed out that their punishment guidelines aren't clear enough for a more severe sentence... and that the NFL was trying to define and impose them after the fact.

/thread

You just surmised what it's taken me thousands of words to still not fully express.

It is all a matter of contract law. Like you inferred, there are no "sentencing guidelines." For all the words that I'm sure exist in the CBA and cognizant documents, it is rather mute and/or ambiguous in both the areas where it discusses the violations and punishment. This has led to the rather arbitrary and head-scratching disparities in the "punishments given" for the "crimes committed" for all the recent events we've witnessed. Since the four corners of the document don’t lend any guidance, she was left with the “common law” approach of trying to piece together a history of precedent for punishments given.

Last edited by dawglover05; 08/03/22 03:42 PM.

Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown

#gmstrong
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,601
Likes: 584
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,601
Likes: 584
Which is why - in my opinion only - the suspension itself is less important than the findings in the published report. And when Sue Robinson seems to imply (quite clearly) that Watson deserved a harsher penalty, but she was confined by the NFL's own policies .... it is serious and worth discussion.


The more things change the more they stay the same.
1 member likes this: PitDAWG
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
j/c:

I'll try this again. While I agree that not being indicted by the GJ means Watson is innocent, I will argue that Judge Robinson's ruling does not prove his guilt.

Why is it so hard to understand that she was not making a legal ruling, but instead, was ruling on whether or not Watson violated The Personal Conduct Policy? I get that some people need to be right, but man!

For months, posters have been telling us that the NFL didn't need legal proof and it was all about whether he violated the Personal Conduct Policy. Now, they are acting like it was an actual legal trial in a court of law.

Play fair.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
Was it sexual assault or not? I'm not parsing through different definitions you posted in order to muddy the waters here. You either conclude he was guilty of sexual assault as was defined clearly or you don't. You also claimed that "sexual assault is not a good term to use when it can mean anything from pinching someone's butt to forcible rape". Which in this case is absolutely false. The definition was clearly defined in this case.

Oh, so just so you know for future reference, sexual assault and rape are two different things. With possibly the exception of Texas. The exception isn't the rule.


Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
P
Legend
Offline
Legend
P
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 66,882
Likes: 1295
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
j/c:

I'll try this again. While I agree that not being indicted by the GJ means Watson is innocent, I will argue that Judge Robinson's ruling does not prove his guilt.

Freudian slip?


Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.

#gmstrong
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 825
Likes: 27
O
All Pro
Offline
All Pro
O
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 825
Likes: 27
Originally Posted by PitDAWG
Was it sexual assault or not? I'm not parsing through different definitions you posted in order to muddy the waters here. You either conclude he was guilty of sexual assault as was defined clearly or you don't. You also claimed that "sexual assault is not a good term to use when it can mean anything from pinching someone's butt to forcible rape". Which in this case is absolutely false. The definition was clearly defined in this case.

Oh, so just so you know for future reference, sexual assault and rape are two different things. With possibly the exception of Texas. The exception isn't the rule.

Quit dancing - what, exactly, is false about my statement?

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,454
Likes: 1269
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,454
Likes: 1269
Here we go.


Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,454
Likes: 1269
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,454
Likes: 1269

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,912
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,912
Likes: 1778
Originally Posted by mgh888
Originally Posted by FATE
Originally Posted by oobernoober
There's another way to look at that as well. According to some of the summaries, Robinson used the same threshold as what would be used in a civil trial. So the assumption is that if Watson's civil cases ever went to trial, he'd probably be found guilty (at least in 4 of the cases).

I'd argue that you're unfairly leaping past the point that all language was defined by the NFL, and the judge was bound by their "post-hoc definitions". That would be a pretty early box on the flowchart that may prevent predicting what would happen in a court of law. Is it possible his actions would even reach a level of "sexual assault" in many venues?

Just my opinion - but I think it's more than reasonable that Robinson would not have included the language about Watson (possibly) deserving a harsher judgement - but that the letter of NFL policy and precedent (seems to have) prevented her from handing out a stiffer penalty..... Unless she felt that Watson's actions did indeed go beyond the level of 'Assault' in a civil court. Sue Robinson was pretty damning with what she said about Watson, I don't think she based that criticism only on a low threshold of NFL policy ... where the policy impacted her decision, ruling and findings she seemed to spell that out.

More than reasonable? First, I'm not saying it's a terrible opinion, I'm sure many share it. However (although unintentional) it's basically cherry-picking a statement out of the context of a very different thought process and explanation. Reading the entire paragraph, I feel like it is an indictment of the league's inept process much more than the level of Deshaun's guilt. JMO

I am bound “by standards of fairness and consistency of treatment among players
similarly situated.” The NFL argues that consistency is not possible, because there are no
similarly-situated players. By ignoring past decisions because none involve “similar” conduct,
however, the NFL is not just equating violent conduct with non-violent conduct, but has elevated
the importance of the latter without any substantial evidence to support its position.
While it may be entirely appropriate to more severely discipline players for non-violent sexual conduct,
I do not believe it is appropriate to do so without notice of the extraordinary change this
position portends for the NFL and its players.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
1 member likes this: Versatile Dog
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Originally Posted by Milk Man
Here we go.


Great. So they hire a female Federal Judge to rule on whether or not Watson violated the Personal Conduct Policy and are appealing the very first decision she made. What a load of crap. I hope Watson's representatives sue them and trash them in court while exposing many of their dirty, dark secrets.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,571
Likes: 507
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 70,571
Likes: 507
Well, this will be dragged and dragged out now … even more.

Watson will probably play to start the year … and then be done for the rest of it IMO


"First down inside the 10. A score here will put us in the Super Bowl. Cooper is far to the left as Njoku settles into the slot. Moore is flanked out wide to the right. Chubb and Ford are split in the backfield as Watson takes the snap ... Here we go."
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
V
Legend
Offline
Legend
V
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Likes: 906
Originally Posted by Milk Man

Read the comments. LOL

They are much like my own. Why even appoint her if you think you understand law better than she does?

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,912
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,912
Likes: 1778
Originally Posted by Milk Man

NOW... Roger gets to decide whether he'll handle the appeal himself or will personally appoint someone else. rofl

A judge tells the league "something stinks", the Rog raises his leg and says "hold my beer".

Can't make this stuff up, folks.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,454
Likes: 1269
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,454
Likes: 1269



Page 2 of 11 1 2 3 4 10 11
DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum watson-suspended-6-games 2

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