DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Quarterback defined Part 2

Posted by Bull;

"Or you admit you don't know, while finding a client sending "💜😏🌹" to an allegedly "professional" massage therapist suspicious."

That's one out of 26 accusers. 26 women is a copious amount of evidence to try and dispute for anyone other than those who try to blow this off as all of these women being some form of prostitutes. Which is ridiculous and demeaning to women in general.

It's as if we're back in the 1960's when if when a woman was raped some men would blame it on the victim for they way they were dressed claiming she was asking for it because she was wearing a mini skirt. There's nothing new about your kind.

Is this a sexual sins blog or a football blog. Cast the first stone if you are without sin.

Your personal refrain at the end is OLD.....did Watson pick Monken.....I've never read a thing about that, please inform us.

When it comes to Watson, it's all relative.

The law did not find enough evidence to even take it to trial. It was brought in front of 2 grand juries and neither found enough evidence to take it to trial. The man got creepy happy ending massages from shady unlicensed massage therapists who then found a way to get paid.

26 women is evidence of something. Evidence of what is the question. Sadly, Prostitution is an all too common occurrence, which can't be summarily discounted as impossible despite your finding it demeaning on behalf of all women.

It's more like we're back further than the '60s and some want to lynch the black man without a trial.

Yes, skeptics like me are nothing new. Liars, as some must be with conflicting testimony, aren't some unknown kind, either. Those that jump to conclusions and insist they know what must have happened without actually seeing all the evidence have been around, too.

Keep telling yourself that and sleep well my friend. I understand there wasn't enough evidence to take it to criminal court. The criminal system has enough to do without utilizing the system for some crimes that will be difficult to try.

However, the details of the cases that did come out are bad enough that anyone with any morals would shun his actions, not defend them. ONE of those where he purposely readjusted him self so that his penis rubbed the young woman's arm.. disgusting! It gets more disgusting when you have (3) daughters around those same ages and think about them being in the workplace.

AGAIN, you are victim blaming/shaming, calling them "shady". Isn't it enough for your argument that they should "expect" this behavior because they are unlicensed? In order to get a job at a state licensed facility or own any place that offers or advertises massage, you in turn need a license. There are no laws against having a private practice to be a traveling practitioner of therapy without a license. It doesn't make them shady, just entrepreneurs. Does this preclude them from being scrutinized by the state, thus having the ability to do shady things behind closed doors for more money? That's pretty obvious and also why Watson chose them. But, to destroy their private lives for the sake of hopefully getting a pay day is not my idea of someone that is normally "practicing shady moral acts". As soon as their names come out, it also opens the door for any man or woman that doesn't have a family and also wants to get paid by someone like TMZ to tear down that person. Believe me, if YOU think it is easy for someone to come out publicly and admit something like this happened to them, there are just as many out there willing to sell information for personal gain.

Now, that takes care of the unlicensed victims... what is your argument for the 9 LICENSED practitioners that filed against him?

Now taking all of this information into account... It is documented that he had 66 different therapists over this time period. Only 27 came forward with complaints. So, your argument holds water for SOME of the other 39 women who did not come forward. Some of which the defense attorney refused to represent because of known "shady" practices. But it still doesn't mean that the other women just didn't want to deal with the public scrutiny from people just like you, for just doing their job.

They wanted $$$ and got paid. Move on!!!

Just because criminal courts aren't allowed to just use common sense, doesn't mean you can't.

9 of those women were licensed therapists. Both grand juries only heard from one victim. That makes it a circumstantial case based on a single witness. They had no idea of the total amount of victims involved. Stop making excuses for sexual assault by blaming the victim.

You dismiss the word of 26 women to excuse watson of committing sexual assault. According to you 26 women lied and only watson is the beacon of truth. I hate to even think how naive one would have to be in order to buy into this and what someone actually thinks of women to claim this.

It's 26 to 1. To claim 26 are lying and the only one telling the truth is watson goes beyond being a skeptic. It's calling 26 women liars. Only a total lack of common sense could lead anyone to that conclusion.

This is a topic that is a continuation from a topic of the same name that was locked due to length. Nobody is forcing you to read it. That's your choice. And nobody is forcing you to whine about it either.

Monkin works for the Browns. If Monkin doesn't know the history here he hasn't done his homework. And pray tell where did I mention Monkin? Here's a clue. I didn't.

I've never sexually assaulted a woman. Consider the first stone cast.

But you are living in the past with a holier than though attitude!!!

Heaven forbid we call out a sexual predator! I mean when someone defends victims of sexual assault it must mean they're being holier than thou.

Do you even read your own posts most of the time? You have judged everyone who doesn't think exactly like you do. But remember that you accused someone else of being "holier than thou" moving forward. That one is going to bite you in the azz.

You are judging a man by hear say from 5 years ago that did not result in a crime. You are trying a man in the court of public opinion. No facts just what someone says happened in their attempt to get $$$ out of the man.

No. No grand jury saw anything but the single accusation in that case only. They had no idea there were 26 women accusing him of sexual assault. They did not see the totality of the evidence in all 26 cases. Public opinion has nothing to do with that.

You have determined that all 26 of those women are liars. That's what being judgemental and being holier than thou looks like. You have determined in your mind that they were all prostitutes and are lying. It goes to show what you think of women in general.

They could only show the evidence that was admissible in court. Why was the grand jury not shown the whole picture? That's right it was hear say and not actual evidence. You believe hear say.

They only allowed evidence that pertained to that case. In your haste you can't seem to figure out that you are judging 26 people. All I'm judging is that all of those 26 people aren't liars. You call it here say and I call it circumstantial evidence. On overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence. No sane individual believes all 26 of these women are lying.

When 26 people accuse one person of a similar crime that's more than just here say. You believe 26 women are all liars. That defies common sense.

So, you are aligned with lynch mobs, and I believe everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty in the court of law.

When did I advocate lynching anyone? We know that "innocent until proven guilty" thing only goes so far with you. The fact of the matter is that only applies depending on who was found guilty.

According to your double standards some are innocent until proven guilty and some are innocent after having been found guilty. That's some real holier than thou stuff right there.

I think they all could be lying, Watson included. People lie. There's potential motivation for them all to lie. I never claimed they all are lying. I simply don't know.

Watson seems at best a pervy horndog, and probably a whoremonger, which would make him a multicount felon, if convicted. I don't really see that stance as defending him.

Maybe some of the accusers aren't lying. I have seen enough digital evidence to suggest that some of them are suspect. I haven't seen concrete evidence of assault.

Basically, I think 26 people said it, so all of their side must be true and only Watson is the liar is bad logic.

Really, I think the named victims probably were legit. Yet, I don't know that as fact. I think Buzbee scrounged up more "victims" looking for a bigger pay day which clouded the potentially legit cases. I think the NFL not including most of the accusers in the packet they submitted to the arbitrator supports that idea.

Edit: another part of me thinks Robert Kraft was just trying to avoid getting linked to another NFL prostitution scandal and called in a favor from Goodell. I think Watson was guilty of something, but the punishment from the NFL was "politically" influenced in how they wrote it up.

You said it was because you are a skeptical person. Out of sheer curiosity, how many women would it take to overcome your skepticism? 25 wasn't enough. Would 30 do it? 35,40?

You see to me, and it seems you at least somewhat agree there was a "victim or victims" and even one is too many.

I think if you review my comments you will see that your assertion.................


................... at least I think that was directed towards me, is totally false. My assertion all along has been for anyone to believe watson didn't do anything you would have to believe that "all 26 women are lying".

I actually do not dismiss your thoughts about people being motivated by money. I don't disagree that an attorney would see claiming more victims would make for stronger case. That's why I've never claimed all of these women were victims.

But I think there is what I like to call a general makeup with any group of people. Different characters with differing morals and what length they are willing to go to in order to enrich themselves. Different levels of honesty and dishonesty. Differing ethical standards and beliefs.

As such I don't lump these women as all being the same as we have seen at least one poster do. In a group of people of any profession you will have different people of differing character. I see this as being no different.

It's not about the quantity, my skepticism is tied to the quality of the evidence, and the existence of contradictory/"ameliorating" evidence. No number is going to sway me in itself.

I said there could have been victims. I find it unlikely they all were lying about everything, but unlikely things do happen.

I never said anything about claiming more victims making a stronger case, so we don't agree there. I think Buzbee weakened the case. But I think he did see more dollar signs, and an opportunity to extort, seemingly with knowledge that some of his clients had participated in illegal activity.

You seem to imply that the general makeup of the group leans towards high morality and honesty. To me, the general makeup of the group seems to lean towards sketchy, indicated to me by the grand juries' failures to indict, the NFL's decision to exclude a majority of the accusers, and the "evidence" Buzbee released to the media not seeming to be something "highly moral" women would agree to. And just the fact that Buzbee is putting "evidence" in the media has me questioning his degree of morality. That evidence seemed to more support a different crime than the one he was allegedly trying in court.

You say you don't lump the women together, but you keep referencing "all 26" over and over in your arguments. Maybe you don't intend it that way, but your intentions aren't always the way you come across to other people.

First of all I indicated no such thing. I said the general makeup of any group varies. That not everyone in a group are the same. Some will be greedy and willing to do anything to enrich themselves. They will have varying standards and morals from individual to individual. Nothing about any of that is an indication of this overall group of women. It just means that if you actually believe all 26 of these women are lying you must believe all of these women are liars and the same in that regard. We have already reached the "Bull is just making things up" portion of our program.


The NFL focused on what appeared to be the most credible accusers. And in the end they found those accusers credible. Those of these women who were victims needed a voice. Nothing about having a lawyer speak on your behalf has nothing to do with being or not being "highly moral". That's yet another thing you just made up.


I'm really not sure how much more simple I can make this for you. To believe watson did nothing wrong you would have to believe that all 26 women are lying. Nowhere I have ever indicated that all 26 women were being truthful. I certainly don't expect someone doing their best to muddy the water to admit how easy that is to understand.