It would be such a Browns thing if we waited for one grand jury to NOT CHARGE him, then another county does charge him after we give him a blockbuster deal.
Trying not to get too descriptive but… for what’s mentioned in the article, for what’s being accused… one doesn’t get to ‘that point’ without some direct interaction prior. So if this person was close enough to the action to get the result of that action, it makes me wonder what part of the action she may have had a part in. Either directly, or by at least watching from a close distance, and staying still, before said result occurred.
Not victim blaming but it does pose that question.
can somebody explain to me why its only single complaints?
are issues like these based on location of the alleged victim or location? seems like the GJ shouldnt be wasting time doing 1 singular case at a time. i dont know how it works at all.
Something I wondered when the trade was breaking...in describing the contract being fully guaranteed, I read a report (which I will try to find again) mentioning no contractual conditions linked to EXISTING charges against him (emphasis mine).
Does anyone know whether the Browns wrote in "out clauses" regarding FUTURE charges? Seems like the prudent thing to do, and not a big deal for Watson, assuming he is not a full-on psychopath demanding perpetual immunity.
Let's be clear, The browns don't want to know the WHOLE STORY,
Quote
Why do you say that?
Quote
Clearly you didn't read or at least comprehend what else I said in that post...
Let me try again.... if you want to investigate anything, and you want the TRUTH. You must look at both sides....Did they talk to any of those that brought charges against Watson? NO.. Therefore they only got one side of the story. They didn't give a damn about the whole truth otherwise they'd have talked to more than just Watsons side...
Did I help you out there? Do you understand now?
Sheesh. Run out of Midol or something? If you think a competent attorney would let their clients be interviewed by someone not involved with a pending trial talk you're nuts. (This excludes prepared Q&A sessions with the media to sway public opinion)
I'm just glad that the Browns did all the due diligence…
The report from FOX 8 said the Browns were already aware of this. Nathan Zegura also confirmed just now on CBD that this is not a surprise at all to the Cleveland Browns.
The biggest problem Watson may have going forward is his defenses in civil cases can sink him into trouble in a criminal court. If he responds to something which opens up new approaches he can be liable because double jeopardy kicks in only at trial.
Actually their attorney stated that the Browns did not approach him and that any of his clients who would have wanted to talk to the Browns he would have had no problem with them doing so.
The attorney for Watson tells the I-Team the complaint was filed by one of the women involved in the civil lawsuit cases.
The complaint started with one of the accusers. Not the prosecutor just pulling it out of thin air. Do you think, that maybe, the accusors attorney might have thought he could get another go at a criminal trial against Watson? he is shopping around looking to get a grand jury to bite. That's likely part of his job.
Why do you need to ne a snarky little brat? Are you in middle school? Have you ever actually had a conversation or discussion where at the end of it someone didn't have to scrap you off their shoe?
The attorney for Watson tells the I-Team the complaint was filed by one of the women involved in the civil lawsuit cases.
The complaint started with one of the accusers. Not the prosecutor just pulling it out of thin air. Do you think, that maybe, the accusors attorney might have thought he could get another go at a criminal trial against Watson? he is shopping around looking to get a grand jury to bite. That's likely part of his job.
Why do you need to ne a snarky little brat? Are you in middle school? Have you ever actually had a conversation or discussion where at the end of it someone didn't have to scrap you off their shoe?
He isn't shopping Grand Jurys. If you look back thru the endless discussion where everyone was pointing out that the Grand Jury refused to indict him I mentioned that the GJ only heard evidence from one of the women. 22 women filed a civil case, but not all of those women have had their evidence before the GJ yet.
The biggest problem Watson may have going forward is his defenses in civil cases can sink him into trouble in a criminal court. If he responds to something which opens up new approaches he can be liable because double jeopardy kicks in only at trial.
The complaint originally was one of 10 filed with the Houston Police Department. However, it was determined that the alleged misconduct occurred beyond the jurisdiction of the Harris County district attorney.
The complainant in the pending criminal case is one of the 22 women who have filed civil lawsuits against Watson.
Worryingly...
As explained within the context of the prior grand jury, the outcome often hinges on the degree to which the prosecutor does, or doesn’t, want to secure an indictment. It’s a one-sided presentation, with the defendant not represented. If the prosecutor wants an indictment, the prosecutor can usually get one.
Right, but DA's do grandstand. I am not taking any position. I am just saying DA is an elected position, so it is a political position to a degree, so having ones name in the news isn't unheard of and sought on many occasions.
Again, I am not saying if it is, isn't, or a little of both.
The biggest problem Watson may have going forward is his defenses in civil cases can sink him into trouble in a criminal court. If he responds to something which opens up new approaches he can be liable because double jeopardy kicks in only at trial.
ahhh ok, thank you.
My biggest concern is that prior to the original GJ wrapping up Watson was pleading the 5th. After the GJ refused to indict he then began to testify. That is where I saw the red flags being raised. It feels to me like he is putting himself at risk for a criminal charge to stick in an effort to get out of the civil claims. Although so far I have been assured that if Watson never sees the field the Browns will only be out of the draft picks, not the money.
Interesting LEX. And how much easier would it be for a prosecutor to get a GJ indictment for a player now no longer the local hero? Now he's another team's asset, so nothing to risk. Cynical, I guess, but that's what I thought when I read your comment.
So, here's where the problem lies - Watson had a Grand Jury hearing on 9 complaints out of the 22 formal civil claims. The Grand Jury did not think there was enough evidence to move forward with a trial. That in no way is any indication of innocence - only that there was not enough evidence to move forward. There are still 13 victims that have not had criminal charges filed on their behalf or not yet pursued. That does not mean that they won't eventually be presented to a Grand Jury - they just have not yet. There's no double jeopardy 1) because it wasn't a trial and 2) each woman has a right to have her claims heard. Technically, at a minimum there could be up to 13 more cases taken to the Grand Jury. The other issue is that supposedly, there were 50 woman involved but only 22 legal claims filed at this point. This technically could drag on for years and years. I'm not making a judgement either way because I don't have the actual evidence but IMHO, we might be reading a lot more about these cases than we do about Watson's play on the field. I don't believe at this point that this going to go away any time soon.
Interesting LEX. And how much easier would it be for a prosecutor to get a GJ indictment for a player now no longer the local hero? Now he's another team's asset, so nothing to risk. Cynical, I guess, but that's what I thought when I read your comment.
I posted an article by Florio with a good video to listen and think about. There is a concern that Watson is going to fight the civil cases and get himself into more trouble. They recommend paying everyone to quiet the issue, but Watson's camp seems determined to fight this. If this next witness has information that get a Bill from the GJ he could be in some real trouble, trying to settle then will be more expensive and may not stop the cascade.
Right, but DA's do grandstand. I am not taking any position. I am just saying DA is an elected position, so it is a political position to a degree, so having ones name in the news isn't unheard of and sought on many occasions.
Again, I am not saying if it is, isn't, or a little of both.
A great point I dont think has been raised. This could be a high profile case that a DA is going to make a name on.
But that's not even close to what you said. Of course the victim makes the complaint. But it's totally in the hands of the prosecutor to look at that complaint, consider all of the evidence and make the decision whether to convene a grand jury based on those factors. Snarky? Well yes. Often times the basis of a totally ridiculous, out of left field comments like trying to claim it's an attorney for the complainant gets to have input on the decision of convening a grand jury doesn't deserve anything more than that.
Hopefully you read the link to better inform yourself. But from reading your last response it seems unlikely.
A great point I dont think has been raised. This could be a high profile case that a DA is going to make a name on.
But that is precisely the issue of thinking the GJ decision NOT to prosecute means much.
DA and Prosecutors "make the name" by WINNING high profile cases ... not by losing them. With a 0.7% success rate of convicting sexual assault cases ... the this high profile case could easily make the prosecutor and DA look bad, because it's extremely hard to prove.
The notion that this is high profile and would sway a DA to lean one way or the other is a double edged sword.
Right, but DA's do grandstand. I am not taking any position. I am just saying DA is an elected position, so it is a political position to a degree, so having ones name in the news isn't unheard of and sought on many occasions.
Again, I am not saying if it is, isn't, or a little of both.
And I certainly don't disagree with you. It's why I've often objected to them being elected. Sadly it creates a situation where DA's are as much politicians as they are serving the justice system. And I certainly agree they like their name in the headlines.
I think our only real disagreement we may have here is they like their names in the headlines for winning, not losing. They run their campaigns often upon their conviction rates. Convening a grand jury and that grand jury not indicting the suspect isn't something any DA would view as a positive thing.
Actually their attorney stated that the Browns did not approach him and that any of his clients who would have wanted to talk to the Browns he would have had no problem with them doing so.
He would have no problem because it could potentially open up much deeper pockets for him to try to get money out of.
The deal IMO is winning may not be what the DA is after. Sure, they want to win, but even if not, they can say they aren't soft on crime, being a high profile figure doesn't impact their decision to prosecute, etc. I am sure we could come up with several other possible benefits.
Being plastered all over the papers, Entertainment Tonight, and whatever else doesn't hurt their image. You never know what political aspirations they may have, be it local, state, or federal.
As to not electing them, I am not sure what other means you might seek? I don't think you want them being appointed by some mayor or some other elected official. It's kind of like a county Sheriff. You don't them to be appointed positions I wouldn't think. I do understand a city for instance hiring a Police Chief.
So, here's where the problem lies - Watson had a Grand Jury hearing on 9 complaints out of the 22 formal civil claims. The Grand Jury did not think there was enough evidence to move forward with a trial. That in no way is any indication of innocence - only that there was not enough evidence to move forward. There are still 13 victims that have not had criminal charges filed on their behalf or not yet pursued. That does not mean that they won't eventually be presented to a Grand Jury - they just have not yet. There's no double jeopardy 1) because it wasn't a trial and 2) each woman has a right to have her claims heard. Technically, at a minimum there could be up to 13 more cases taken to the Grand Jury. The other issue is that supposedly, there were 50 woman involved but only 22 legal claims filed at this point. This technically could drag on for years and years. I'm not making a judgement either way because I don't have the actual evidence but IMHO, we might be reading a lot more about these cases than we do about Watson's play on the field. I don't believe at this point that this going to go away any time soon.
Whatever keeps Haslam up at night works for me. And you KNOW the media (especially in Cleveland where DRAMA is KING) will have a field day with this as long as it continues. Talk about a dumpster fire. LOL
I suspect Buzbee has these cases broken into groups and prioritized. His first group was a loss for him, so now he is trying to feel out if he can get a different Grand Jury to indict. He has a plan on which is next based on what happens with this one. He is shopping around looking for a fit to get a wedge in.
Just because he seems slimy doesn't mean he isn't working the system. This roller coaster ride is far from over.
Once again, as has been proven to you, Buzzbee has NO part of the decision to convene or appoint a grand jury or select the members on a grand jury. For God's sake man.
Already known cases, just couldn't file with the other potential cases because of jurisdiction. We'll see what their recommendation is, but it sure sounds like there is no good hard evidence to pursue a case.
I've mentioned this last week when the deal for Watson was announced...
...given Watson's history concerning these sexual misconduct cases...what to the Browns do when .."the first woman from Cleveland"... accuses Watson of a sexual abuse case..?
IMO, there is a chance that Watson's history will follow him, where ever he goes.
Even if Watson settles all of the pending civil suites from Texas, it does not mean he won't "be accused" of similar cases while living and playing in Cleveland.
It may or may not be fair, but once an individual has a history of such conduct...they can become a suspect for any allegation.
This entire situation with Watson may never turn out to be a case where Watson is able to escape his past in Texas and start over in a different state, such as Ohio.
I've mentioned this last week when the deal for Watson was announced...
...given Watson's history concerning these sexual misconduct cases...what to the Browns do when .."the first woman from Cleveland"... accuses Watson of a sexual abuse case..?
IMO, there is a chance that Watson's history will follow him, where ever he goes.
Even if Watson settles all of the pending civil suites from Texas, it does not mean he won't "be accused" of similar cases while living and playing in Cleveland.
It may or may not be fair, but once an individual has a history of such conduct...they can become a suspect for any allegation.
This entire situation with Watson may never turn out to be a case where Watson is able to escape his past in Texas and start over in a different state, such as Ohio.
The real concern is that his thing is certain actions and he would be satisfied with them. My concern is his thing may be certain actions with constantly different people, which could really increase is liability going forward. If your wife/gf/partner is okay with X and that is your kink, you are ok. But if your kink involves going to multiple people you have a greater risk.
They will tar and feather her. They will call her a liar because there's no eye witness. They will attack her character and banish her from the city of Cleveland.
It could also turn out that Watson counter-sues these women, and they all end up as destitute pariahs. It's easy to play the what-if game. There's not much point without more facts.
We all know why, of course. That's not a good look, IMO.
Or perhaps it's because they have work to do. People want them to add DL and receivers, and trade Mayfield. It's hard to do that without working the phones.
Regardless of why, the reason likely isn't as simple and straightforward as some will try to paint it.
We all know why, of course. That's not a good look, IMO.
Or perhaps it's because they have work to do. People want them to add DL and receivers, and trade Mayfield. It's hard to do that without working the phones.
Regardless of why, the reason likely isn't as simple and straightforward as some will try to paint it.
I think it is pretty cut and dry. They both didn't want to address the media that floods those events without a formal press conference first. That, and all the well-to-do people that attend those events asking the same questions over and over again. Not to mention, just the overall backlash so early after the trade.
We all know why, of course. That's not a good look, IMO.
Or perhaps it's because they have work to do. People want them to add DL and receivers, and trade Mayfield. It's hard to do that without working the phones.
Regardless of why, the reason likely isn't as simple and straightforward as some will try to paint it.
A little outlandish, but, yes, that's an example of the what-if game. It's also a good example of why what-ifs don't deserve much credence.
Yet some deserve more than others. A continuation of a current pattern is less outlandish and would hold better odds of holding credence than most other what ifs.
They will tar and feather her. They will call her a liar because there's no eye witness. They will attack her character and banish her from the city of Cleveland.
... all while the other THEYs will be shouting them down with the counter-arguments. All while a third (much smaller) group watches as both groups, armed with absolutely no pertinent information, try to bury one or more of Watson and accuser and their respective supporters.
Seriously... you calling out a hypothetical group of people in this hypothetical situation for jumping to conclusions is unreal.
Someone mentioned that the lady that apparently sent some of the damaging text messages is now pleading the fifth and it's a sign that she has been bought off.
Pleading the fifth is a right and NOT an indication of guilt. For whatever she chose to do it for, that is her right.
Some find it very logical that 22 women is pertinent information. Some do not.
There's a difference between pertinent and conclusive.
Some seem to believe that the veracity of claims don't matter if there are 22 of them.
Some seem to be more concerned with the narrative and the theoretical with little to no regard to the truth and the actual.
Some seem to be unable to separate their beliefs from reality.
The real world sucks. There aren't always clearly delineated good guys and bad guys. It's not a math problem with straight numbers where 22 doesn't represent anything more complex than a simple number.
Each of the 22 constantly referred to in this "case" is a unique and complex situation. They're not the probabilistic average woman.
A rush to judgement rarely leads to a completely accurate conclusion.
What cracks me up is that Watsons attorney acted as if he was aware this might happen.. He was prepared with a statement that these were not new charges...
Now comes the question, if he knew it, how does he not revealing it to the Browns effect the deal if at all.
The browns said they did research into his situation, but clearly, not very good research.... I fear we blew this.
What cracks me up is that Watsons attorney acted as if he was aware this might happen.. He was prepared with a statement that these were not new charges...
Now comes the question, if he knew it, how does he not revealing it to the Browns effect the deal if at all.
The browns said they did research into his situation, but clearly, not very good research.... I fear we blew this.
The Browns were aware. FOX 8 reported as such when the news came out as well.
That's good news for Watson. And it eliminates a hurdle for the Browns,,,
I wanna be clear about something
I'm impressed the browns went to the lengths they went to to get Watson. I don't remember a time when we've had a QB the caliber of Watson on the Browns.. (bernie was the smartest)
I do think they gave up too much and didn't do the research they said they did which could lead to problems later.
Problems that may be tough to overcome if things with Watson go south. Given the allegations against him, there has to be some truth to it... But my hope as a Browns fan is that it's all a bunch of Hooey and he comes in here and leads the team to a Superbowl...... or three.
If I recall correctly double jeopardy is based on being in jeopardy which is delineated in a trial once a jury is seated. If there is a mistrial the jeopardy condition doesn't go away unless the trial is found to be with prejudice. A mistrial without prejudice would allow the defendant to stay in jeopardy.
So now that 24 people (it looks like Texas grand juries have 12 members) have had access to the evidence and have decided there's not enough to even go to trial, does that change the minds of anybody?
Hey, that's two grand juries now. That says something. Whatever he is into or did, apparently did not reach criminal behavior, but just creepy perversions. I don't believe for a second that all 22 women are lying, But I feel better after the second jury decided not to indict. It confirms what he did was legal, but creepy. OR he is being targeted like he claims.
So a second grand jury refused to file criminal charges. I just wonder how many will look at this and take a different stand about Watson. As I have said before, I don't know what he did. I don't know who is lying. But I do know that grand juries do take things seriously and if they can't find a reason to charge, there probably isn't one. Especially if two GJ come to the same conclusion.
I wish the talk about Watson in the "Pure Football" forum would be about what Watson can do for the Browns on the field, in the locker room, and how he can attract free agents, but it isn't going to happen. So......here are a couple of thoughts I had while reading this garbage.
It appears that the Baker fans are hoping that Watson gets in big-time trouble so Baker can keep his job. Save your time because I think the Browns have had enough of Baker Mayfield and he was gone even if the team did not get Watson.
Secondly, it's odd that so many people attack Mac on the Analytics thread--and I agree that it's dumb to not believe in analytics and the intellectual prowess of this front office--yet many of those same folks are acting like the Browns Front Office did not take the necessary steps or do the proper research in examining the QB situation. LMAO......it's hilarious to think that guys who attended Ivy League schools are clueless about all the ramifications of the situation. Once again, it's a lot of stomping of the feet and adolescent whining by the Baker fan base.
We all know why, of course. That's not a good look, IMO.
Or perhaps it's because they have work to do. People want them to add DL and receivers, and trade Mayfield. It's hard to do that without working the phones.
Regardless of why, the reason likely isn't as simple and straightforward as some will try to paint it.
there are only 31 teams. I could call all 31 teams in 1.5 hours
I wish the talk about Watson in the "Pure Football" forum would be about what Watson can do for the Browns on the field, in the locker room, and how he can attract free agents, but it isn't going to happen. So......here are a couple of thoughts I had while reading this garbage.
It appears that the Baker fans are hoping that Watson gets in big-time trouble so Baker can keep his job. Save your time because I think the Browns have had enough of Baker Mayfield and he was gone even if the team did not get Watson.
Secondly, it's odd that so many people attack Mac on the Analytics thread--and I agree that it's dumb to not believe in analytics and the intellectual prowess of this front office--yet many of those same folks are acting like the Browns Front Office did not take the necessary steps or do the proper research in examining the QB situation. LMAO......it's hilarious to think that guys who attended Ivy League schools are clueless about all the ramifications of the situation. Once again, it's a lot of stomping of the feet and adolescent whining by the Baker fan base.
We all know why, of course. That's not a good look, IMO.
Or perhaps it's because they have work to do. People want them to add DL and receivers, and trade Mayfield. It's hard to do that without working the phones.
Regardless of why, the reason likely isn't as simple and straightforward as some will try to paint it.
there are only 31 teams. I could call all 31 teams in 1.5 hours
How many players, agents, personal references, etc are out there? How much tape on those players is there to watch? They're also planning a press conference for tomorrow. They're probably making more detailed development plans for Watson as related to football and the team.
We didn't know we were getting Watson until recently. All the non-Watson contingencies are no longer in play, and new plans will likely be developed in greater detail. The draft will be here soon. Our draft capital changed a lot. The team has a lot on its plate.
I wish the talk about Watson in the "Pure Football" forum would be about what Watson can do for the Browns on the field, in the locker room, and how he can attract free agents, but it isn't going to happen. So......here are a couple of thoughts I had while reading this garbage.
It appears that the Baker fans are hoping that Watson gets in big-time trouble so Baker can keep his job. Save your time because I think the Browns have had enough of Baker Mayfield and he was gone even if the team did not get Watson.
Secondly, it's odd that so many people attack Mac on the Analytics thread--and I agree that it's dumb to not believe in analytics and the intellectual prowess of this front office--yet many of those same folks are acting like the Browns Front Office did not take the necessary steps or do the proper research in examining the QB situation. LMAO......it's hilarious to think that guys who attended Ivy League schools are clueless about all the ramifications of the situation. Once again, it's a lot of stomping of the feet and adolescent whining by the Baker fan base.
Hey!!! This is the first post I've seen from you in a while.... Welcome back! Missed ya.
Hardin also took exception to criticism of the Browns for not interviewing any of the women accusing Watson of misconduct. He also provided the Browns with depositions and knows they gathered copious amounts of information from numerous sources.
“No team would go interview the women or the opposing lawyer while there’s a criminal investigation going on for fear they would be accused of trying to obstruct justice,’’ Hardin said. “They didn’t need to because these women all filed public lawsuits. Eight of them filed criminal complaints, so we know what they say happened. The Browns did tremendous research on this as did the other teams.’’
I almost wish I was a forensic accountant, so I could try to figure out how much money teams and the league spent investigating Watson and the cases. I'd bet the number is ridiculous.
We all know why, of course. That's not a good look, IMO.
Or perhaps it's because they have work to do. People want them to add DL and receivers, and trade Mayfield. It's hard to do that without working the phones.
Regardless of why, the reason likely isn't as simple and straightforward as some will try to paint it.
there are only 31 teams. I could call all 31 teams in 1.5 hours
Sure, you could call them. Sometimes(many) you need to schedule a time with people. GM's aren't always sitting by the ready to take trade calls.
Many assume that Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson eventually will be suspended for the civil and criminal allegations that have been made against him. The number — 22 civil complaints and two additional criminal complaints who did not sue Watson — is large enough to be troubling on its face. Whatever the critical mass of complaints that will naturally cause concern, 24 is on the wrong side of it.
The league knows this. Some have concluded that the failure of the league to take action against Watson means that the league won’t, at least not until the 22 civil cases are resolved. That’s possibly a misreading of the situation.
The league hasn’t placed Watson on the Commissioner exempt list (a fancy label for paid leave) because it hasn’t had to. He didn’t try to play for the Texans in 2021. He wasn’t traded to a new team that would have tried to put him on the field. Now with the Browns, he won’t play until August at the earliest.
The league has made the Personal Conduct Policy more than broad enough to permit paid leave, even in the absence of criminal charges. “When an investigation leads the Commissioner to believe that a player may have violated this Policy by committing any of the conduct identified above,” the Policy explains, “he may act where the circumstances and evidence warrant doing so. This decision will not reflect a finding of guilt or innocence and will not be guided by the same legal standards and considerations that would apply in a criminal trial.
”The key words are “may have violated.” With 24 people accusing Watson of sexual misconduct during massage therapy sessions and Watson’s lawyer admitting that some massage therapy sessions did indeed become voluntary sexual encounters, there’s enough for the Commissioner to conclude that Watson “may have violated” the Personal Conduct Policy.
Remember, Ben Roethlisberger was suspended six games (reduced to four) in 2010 for two sexual misconduct allegations, neither of which resulted in criminal charges. In 2017, Ezekiel Elliott was suspended six games for domestic violence allegations that ended in neither criminal nor civil claims. The league can, and will, do whatever it chooses — and the decisions quite often will be driven not by notions of fairness and justice but by balancing the P.R. consequences of taking action and not taking action.
On Monday, I suggested that the league should tell Watson that he can either settle the cases and take an unpaid suspension to start the season or keep fighting the cases and be placed on paid leave until they are resolved. I now believe the league won’t do that. The league won’t do that because the league doesn’t do that. It doesn’t telegraph its plans or tip its hand.
The league has learned to keep its head low and its mouth shut in these matters, or as long as it can. The league will act when the time comes to act. And I’m currently confident that, if 22 civil cases remain pending against Watson when it’s time to play games, Watson won’t be playing in those games.
The league won’t tell Watson or the Browns that. The league will expect Watson and the Browns to figure it out on their own. And the league will shed no tears and make no apologies if/when they decide to place Watson on paid leave, if Watson fails to get the cases settled before football season rolls around.
Which are you talking about? Are you talking about the legal side (the decision that they should/could prosecute)? If so, then yes 2 GJs choosing no is significant.
But IMO, the bigger issue (that I'm wrestling with) is the 'Watson is a creep' issue. IMO, another GJ declining doesn't lessen how much I think Watson is a creep, the fact that SOMETHING more than likely happened in the 22 instances we're talking about. I'm speaking more to Watson and his actions and trying to cut out the legal wrangling/shenanigans.
IMO, we still are no closer to knowing what he actually did/didn't do. So (for me) the wait continues.
Odd! Too much going on to be a mere coincidence. I smell something major in the works (of course that is just the conspiracy theorist in me...lol).
I guess so...I don't know what could be in the works.
My guess if the PC is two fold. If the Haslams were there, most of the questions would be about the Why's of the hire.
With Watson, Berry and Coach, it can easily be direct to the football end of things. Questions about the legal stuff can be directed towards the Haslams at the 2nd PC. If the Haslams were in the building, the natural question would why aren't they here now?
No doubt in the world of business this would fall under crisis communications and people are well versed on the best way to control things. I understand some people don't understand and think it BS, but too bad.
This way one PC's will deal with one end of the matter and the other will deal with the other end. If some you actually stop and think about it, you will probably come to see this is the best way go.
The 1st rule of giving a press conference is to be in control of the press conference.
Some find it very logical that 22 women is pertinent information. Some do not.
As someone said, 22 is pertinent, but not conclusive. You're conflating the 2, and then ignoring the rest of the evidence (this just what we know, after all).
Who knows... you could be 100% right. I don't know, but neither do you. For me, I choose to try to not jump to conclusions, and it's irritating when someone spams the entire board pretending they know everything.
What I wonder about in reference to the NFL judgement is what happens if all the civil cases get settled? Or, if he does go to a civil trial and is found not guilty.
That would mean two grand jury's and a civil trial decided he is innocent.
How could the NFL suspend him?
In my mind the owners of the teams that submitted a bid already know. Goodell works for the owners. There is no way they don't know. Phone calls were made. None of those owners would be ready to make that kind of investment without knowing about a suspension. I just don't believe that.
1. GJs failing to charge and settling civil cases is NOT innocent.
therefore
2. NFL is on its own program. They are under no obligation to take direction from the results from the legal process (under their personal conduct policy).
The NFL won't wait until the Civil Suits are finished. The Civil Cases could, and probably will, take years to resolve. The Plaintiff's Lawyer gets paid if and when a judgement is decided. This AFTER Appeals, etc.... Watson's Lawyers get paid, Period, by the hour. So obviously they want a long case. After the NFL makes their ruling that will be appealed.
Which are you talking about? Are you talking about the legal side (the decision that they should/could prosecute)? If so, then yes 2 GJs choosing no is significant.
But IMO, the bigger issue (that I'm wrestling with) is the 'Watson is a creep' issue. IMO, another GJ declining doesn't lessen how much I think Watson is a creep, the fact that SOMETHING more than likely happened in the 22 instances we're talking about. I'm speaking more to Watson and his actions and trying to cut out the legal wrangling/shenanigans.
IMO, we still are no closer to knowing what he actually did/didn't do. So (for me) the wait continues.
I was really just wondering if it "changed the math" for those focused on the number 22.
Is he a creep or is he just a promiscuous, rich, young athlete? Obviously, he's not entirely puritanical when it comes to sex, but, if both parties went into it willingly, how he chooses to get freaky isn't football relevant. He's definitely not the first, and won't be the last, player to have multiple casual partners. I'd like to think I'd be more selective and discreet if I were in his position, but if attractive masseuses were offering extra services I can't be sure I'd always say no in the moment. In my early 20s, my resolve being overridden by hormones would only have been more likely. It's easy to say pick one and settle down, but he's young and the average age of men getting married in the US is 30.4 according to the census bureau. link Throw in the fact that his significant other is a musician, so there could be a touring schedule. Busy, traveling professionals could have decided that an open relationship with "only physical" one night stands was preferred to emotional cheating which could have contributed to the numbers. I don't pretend to know the lifestyles of the rich and the famous.
Hopefully that's all this was and he learns from it.
I agree that the wait continues, and we could never actually know. The truth could be stranger than fiction/my "hopeful" speculation.
Some find it very logical that 22 women is pertinent information. Some do not.
As someone said, 22 is pertinent, but not conclusive. You're conflating the 2, and then ignoring the rest of the evidence (this just what we know, after all).
Who knows... you could be 100% right. I don't know, but neither do you. For me, I choose to try to not jump to conclusions, and it's irritating when someone spams the entire board pretending they know everything.
"Your search for '22 women PitDAWG' returned 200 results."
He's toppled the algorithm, search results page only shows the first two hundred results.
That's enough spam to feed the what's left of the Russian military.
Some find it very logical that 22 women is pertinent information. Some do not.
As someone said, 22 is pertinent, but not conclusive. You're conflating the 2, and then ignoring the rest of the evidence (this just what we know, after all).
Who knows... you could be 100% right. I don't know, but neither do you. For me, I choose to try to not jump to conclusions, and it's irritating when someone spams the entire board pretending they know everything.
"Your search for '22 women PitDAWG' returned 200 results."
He's toppled the algorithm, search results page only shows the first two hundred results.
That's enough spam to feed the what's left of the Russian military.
Spam has an unfair bad rep. You can make a terrific breakfast sangy with a slice of fried spam, an over-easy egg, and a toasted English muffin. I am just sayin'.
If the accusers' lawyer is half the goofball people say he is, I think we'll find out plenty in due time.
(IMO and FWIW)
I was trying to find the demographics for the polls of the election he lost not too long ago. I was hoping to find a gender breakdown. If he had had a poor showing amongst female voters, a high profile sexual assault case could have been taken in an attempt to change how he's viewed by that demographic. Unfortunately, I couldn't find any info on the gubernatorial* race broken down by gender.
I don't know about goofball, but he wants to be a "goober."
* actually I think it was mayoral, but governor could be a logical progression.
Owners meetings are going on this week in West Palm Beach, they aren't on vacation. Although I'm sure these events have plenty of free time or lavish parties/gatherings.
I watched the Rich Eisen video and I think he brought up a good question, who uses 22 different masseuses (and there may be more)? Most people use 2 or 3 then stick with one they like so why did Watson constantly hire different ones?
Also Watson wasn't/isn't likely to be indicted by a Grand Jury, from what I have read and heard it doesn't seem that he physically forced himself on these women he just threatened their jobs and such and most Grand Juries aren't going to indict someone if it's a he said/she said thing. Unless these women have a witness or a recording of Watson threatening them it's not likely to happen.
A guy that uses that many isn't really interested in the massage itself. A guy that seems to prefer non-licensed (or sorta-licensed or whatever), and seems to prefer to find therapists via social media vs the team or teammates is not interested in the massage itself. To me, it's obvious he's a creep. But the question in my mind is does his creepiness rise to the level of me (and others) not wanting him to be on our team. Some want to make it seem like he was simply paying for sex. Others want to make it seem that he committed rape and/or sex assault. Not even trying to get into the legal side of things, there's a grey area between the two sides where the truth actually falls. Obviously, the FO established a line and determined that he was on the side closer to the former interpretation.
As to the last line, regardless of where the FO feels his responsibility lies, I hope they (and he) haven't left the elephant in the room.
He has an addiction. It's not just 22 women, it's over 50, you can be relatively sure he tried to have sex with all of them. While I get it as far as young men and their "conquests" go, this is pretty extreme. Especially considering there was backlash and "word on the street" along the way.
I sincerely hope our inquest wasn't met with "I didn't do anything wrong, it was consensual"... the issue is much deeper than that.
While there's no denying his talent on the field, "Deshaun the person" has a long road in front of himself before we can say he's a great person. Humans soften up quite a bit when someone admits they have a problem. Sadly, that won't be stated in the short term because of ongoing legal issues.
This is a make-or-break move. Sports fans and media are pretty short in the patience department. We'll need to see immediate results on the field or the mud-slinging may be exacerbated by everything going on off the field.
Going forward from this point on it will be interesting to see how fast things will fade.
News gets old fast.
Soon it will be all about passing yards completed, touchdowns and ints.
If we win it will become really old news.
Not necessarily with the group of hacks that is the Cleveland sports writers. Most of them should report for TMZ with as much drama as they write about as opposed to the actual on field results. LOL
A guy that uses that many isn't really interested in the massage itself. A guy that seems to prefer non-licensed (or sorta-licensed or whatever), and seems to prefer to find therapists via social media vs the team or teammates is not interested in the massage itself. To me, it's obvious he's a creep. But the question in my mind is does his creepiness rise to the level of me (and others) not wanting him to be on our team. Some want to make it seem like he was simply paying for sex. Others want to make it seem that he committed rape and/or sex assault. Not even trying to get into the legal side of things, there's a grey area between the two sides where the truth actually falls. Obviously, the FO established a line and determined that he was on the side closer to the former interpretation.
Is he really a creep? I'd say most guys like a pretty woman giving them a rub down.
I am not really sticking up for the guy as much as to say I wouldn't say it's creepy. For that matter, why is it not a bit "creepy" to rub down strangers?
Would you rub down a stranger? LOL...OK, not fair, not trying to put you on the spot...I am just saying to illustrate the point a bit.
Sure... if you ignore the fact that "rubbing down a stranger" is actually a legit profession (massage therapists are an integral part to NFL athletes keeping their bodies in performance shape). Do you know what a sports massage is?
It's factual that he saw 0ver 40 different massage therapists - I think that is over a 12 month span - leaving out the issue of consensual or otherwise, he was doing it for or expecting/paying for sexual favors. That's basically without question.
I find it troubling he says he has no problem or issue and does not need counselling. Now maybe that's a public statement because to say otherwise might have legal ramifications with the NFL and with the 22 civil cases ... but it may also play against him with the NFL.
More statements that are at odds with what happened ... all of the teams involved started the pursuit of Watson AFTER the criminal case was essentially resolved by the GJ ... and you'll have to convince me that seeking out both sides of a story is considered interfering. I call Baloney.
Berry's comment was about community perception. I don't think it was in reference to Watson needing help.
Are you saying that based on watching and listening live? Or based on the content of the tweet... I mean, reading the tweet and twisting it in my head, it might mean what you say but I think that is not the way it reads. He's talking first person Watson, says work is still needed and then reafirms the subject is Watson. First part is Watson by name, last bit is Watson by name - you'd have to take an enormous leap of faith to think the middle bit wasn't about Watson.
I'm posting shorthand of the conversation. The context was such that "what would you do differently", and that's how he answered. Even if everything went down exactly like his defense lawyer laid out, there's still at least some bit of "lessons learned" for Watson. Saying that he had zero control of the situation is... worrisome.
It was this part, and two other parts that had me smacking my head. It's not a good look, but I'm not really sure how you can admit to needing to improve/do more/do things differently without throwing chum in the water.
Berry's comment was about community perception. I don't think it was in reference to Watson needing help.
Are you saying that based on watching and listening live? Or based on the content of the tweet... I mean, reading the tweet and twisting it in my head, it might mean what you say but I think that is not the way it reads. He's talking first person Watson, says work is still needed and then reafirms the subject is Watson. First part is Watson by name, last bit is Watson by name - you'd have to take an enormous leap of faith to think the middle bit wasn't about Watson.
Peen is correct, Berry was about perception in the community. As for the response of Watson saying he does not need to see a therapist, that was in direct response to MKC question asking him if he has a sex problem and needs to seek help.
They will tar and feather her. They will call her a liar because there's no eye witness. They will attack her character and banish her from the city of Cleveland.
Woah, easy there chief. This is Deshaun Watson, not Bill Clinton. How many of the women who are current accusers have received this kind of treatment in Houston or in Cleveland or anywhere? I'm not saying you can't find some random examples of people being stupid but is there any kind of a mass movement to destroy these women? If so, I haven't seen any evidence of it.
I'm posting shorthand of the conversation. The context was such that "what would you do differently", and that's how he answered. Even if everything went down exactly like his defense lawyer laid out, there's still at least some bit of "lessons learned" for Watson. Saying that he had zero control of the situation is... worrisome.
I understand the sentiment, but if he's maintaining his innocence and taking a strong position that you did nothing wrong and have 22 civil cases still pending, what can he really say other than what he said?
Saying anything other could come across as blaming the alleged victims.
More statements that are at odds with what happened ... all of the teams involved started the pursuit of Watson AFTER the criminal case was essentially resolved by the GJ ... and you'll have to convince me that seeking out both sides of a story is considered interfering. I call Baloney.
Call it what you want. A claimant attorney might call it witness tampering. You are best served to stay away from your baloney.
Berry's comment was about community perception. I don't think it was in reference to Watson needing help.
Are you saying that based on watching and listening live? Or based on the content of the tweet... I mean, reading the tweet and twisting it in my head, it might mean what you say but I think that is not the way it reads. He's talking first person Watson, says work is still needed and then reafirms the subject is Watson. First part is Watson by name, last bit is Watson by name - you'd have to take an enormous leap of faith to think the middle bit wasn't about Watson.
I watched. Either way, it isn't a point worth squabbling about.
I agree. I think it went pretty much as I expected. I don't know what some people were expecting.
All the answers from all involved sound genuine enough to me.
I have always wondered why reporters keep asking the same questions? It must be they only prepared 2 questions, feeling they would be the first reported to ask a question.
If I was the one answering, I would say "I have already answered that question....next"
Peen...what the helll happened to that ZOOM call you claimed the Haslams were going to use to participate in Watson's news conference..?
Just another claim in an attempt that turns out to be completely false as some stoop to any low in an attempt to make the Haslams look like stand up folks that can be trusted...right?
How telling is it when the one person most responsible for this newest Browns mess refuses to even be seen with Watson on his introduction day...sad.
I agree he was just maintaining his innocence. However, I'm surprised he didn't do it more tactfully. "I don't regret my actions as I didn't do what was alleged, but I do regret the effect this situation has had on real victims of sexual misconduct," or something along those lines would have gone over better. He needs a better PR consultant or at least to do a better job of implementing one's plan.
I was all for him fighting it out in court if he was innocent. Now I'm thinking settling is the way to go. Not based on his presumed guilt or innocence, but in how he is perceived on the stand. I could definitely see a jury finding the accusers more sympathetic.
The most telling part of the entire press conference...when Watson was asked if he had any regrets... Watson showed absolutely NO REMORSE for anything that happened.
I guess all 22 of those women called their own phone number and invited themselves to Watson's home...that's seems to be the story that Watson and the Browns are going to try to sell to the Browns fans, women and men.
The most telling part of the entire press conference...when Watson was asked if he had any regrets... Watson showed absolutely NO REMORSE for anything that happened.
I guess all 22 of those women called their own phone number and invited themselves to Watson's home...that's seems to be the story that Watson and the Browns are going to try to sell to the Browns fans, women and men.
Why should he regret doing nothing wrong? He was not charged. These women tried to extort money out of him for a consensual act. So he and his lawyer encouraged them to file a police report. He would not discuss $$$ with them. Coincidentally, Jane Doe #3 from the original police report already stated she lied. He also has 18 other women that gave him a massage say he always acted professionally with them. Again, he was accused, not found guilty. You do not have to regret any actions when you do nothing wrong.
It appears that the Baker fans are hoping that Watson gets in big-time trouble so Baker can keep his job. Save your time because I think the Browns have had enough of Baker Mayfield and he was gone even if the team did not get Watson.
Yeah, it has nothing to do with those 22 women. At least for some people.
Some find it very logical that 22 women is pertinent information. Some do not.
As someone said, 22 is pertinent, but not conclusive. You're conflating the 2, and then ignoring the rest of the evidence (this just what we know, after all).
Who knows... you could be 100% right. I don't know, but neither do you. For me, I choose to try to not jump to conclusions, and it's irritating when someone spams the entire board pretending they know everything.
It's also irritating that what seem like normal people can't understand that 22 accusers is overwhelming and how quickly they will try to dismiss that. I guess we all have our own version of what's frustrating.
Is he really a creep? I'd say most guys like a pretty woman giving them a rub down.
Then you say this.....
Quote
I am not really sticking up for the guy as much as to say I wouldn't say it's creepy. For that matter, why is it not a bit "creepy" to rub down strangers?
Would you rub down a stranger? LOL...OK, not fair, not trying to put you on the spot...I am just saying to illustrate the point a bit.
You do realize you just stuck up for watson by trying to place the blame on the accusers, right? The very thing you claimed you weren't doing. I've got news for you. We have a poster that is a female licensed massage therapist. If you would like to know who it is PM me. Then maybe you would like to explain this to her.
Jimmy is in promotion mode and Dee is in damage control mode. They are tag teaming the fan base.
Jimmy keeps revisiting how much time they put in. I get why he's saying it, but for fans who hate the move, he's saying they spent a lot of time getting comfortable in their own skin, while just shoving it up fans butts with almost zero notice. Just saying there are two side of that perspective.
DeShaun Watson did ok except for the “having no regrets” part. Who advice him to such a idiotic answer? He seems genuine but I can clearly see why he is accused by these 22 women. He seems like a intelligent and nice guy but maybe early fame and success made him a little bit arrogant and “above” how you normally interact with women. In the sense that he’s probably just not used to being rejected. My advice would be to settle these cases with compensations. Being part of a long legal battle helps nobody.
Andrew Berry looked really uncomfortable. His voice was low, almost whispering and without his normal confidence. His eyes wasn’t steady and his body language was defensive. He didn’t sat straight with his back and his head was hangin. For me body language says a lot more then rehearsed answers. Berry is a professional GM so there is no excuses.
My general conclusion from listening to a Berry is that he didn’t answered one single question directly, most of it was general standpoints saying everything and nothing. By far his worst public appearance I can remember.
Stefanski was just a side kick that nobody was really interested in. Looked like a teacher who was just happy to be there. Maybe that’s his level.
As usual the local media was looking for sensational headlines. Using “attacking” questions will never create open and honest answers. Nobody opens up when the atmosphere is a little bit hostile.
As usual the local media was looking for sensational headlines. Using “attacking” questions will never create open and honest answers. Nobody opens up when the atmosphere is a little bit hostile.
Weird. I thought the local media did an excellent job asking tough, direct questions as they should have done.
Im glad you brought up the body language. The weird part for me was how quietly Berry was speaking. He generally doesn't give much in the way of info to reporters (and he even explicitly made an exception and talked about some contract details), but you can also usually hear him speak.
The other weird thing was that they never looked at Watson when they were speaking about/to him. That seemed weird to me.
They will tar and feather her. They will call her a liar because there's no eye witness. They will attack her character and banish her from the city of Cleveland.
Woah, easy there chief. This is Deshaun Watson, not Bill Clinton. How many of the women who are current accusers have received this kind of treatment in Houston or in Cleveland or anywhere? I'm not saying you can't find some random examples of people being stupid but is there any kind of a mass movement to destroy these women? If so, I haven't seen any evidence of it.
The spin is continually ongoing. I mean read the thread for examples. Look at the media. For all of those claiming it's one sided, many are trying to make it look as though watson is the good guy and these women have character flaws. Was my comment hyperbole? It certainly was. But at the same time there's a kernel of truth to it. People often have kinder, gentler way of undermining people. That doesn't change what they're doing. And no, deshawn isn't Bill Clinton. Even Clinton didn't have this many accusers. But Trump does. There's even audio of his behavior and proof he paid off a porn star. It just goes to show that people's priorities aren't half as important to them as they claim they are. That, or their priorities aren't in the order they professed them to be.
Jimmy is in promotion mode and Dee is in damage control mode. They are tag teaming the fan base.
Call it what you want, but they answered the questions. Some people have already made their minds up. Many here don't like the Haslams and will never give them the benefit of doubt. Many have drawn their own conclusions about Watson, and will never change their opinion. That's just the way of the world.
Those who don't like it, will continue to throw what ever spin they can come up with to bend the narrative their way. And those who feel otherwise will do the same. The only problem I have, is on these boards, many tend to attack those who disagree. There are a few, who thrive on forcing their opinion on others. It really has brought the quality of this board way down.
As for your comment, it is more than apparent, that your mind is made up that no matter what is said, or evidence is presented, you will never change your mind. That's okay, it's your right, but it doesn't necessarily mean you are right or wrong. But, as you expect others mto respect your opinion, you should also do the same.
Yet many of us were fans no matter what right up until this happened. And if you want to talk about spin, stop acting like those supporting watson aren't doing the same thing. So all of you're "they hate Haslam" BS doesn't fly. If that were the reason we wouldn't have been supporting this team right up until they traded for watson.
Im glad you brought up the body language. The weird part for me was how quietly Berry was speaking. He generally doesn't give much in the way of info to reporters (and he even explicitly made an exception and talked about some contract details), but you can also usually hear him speak.
The other weird thing was that they never looked at Watson when they were speaking about/to him. That seemed weird to me.
It's a weird situation, especially with ongoing legal proceedings (even if civil rather than criminal.) There's probably a lot that they want to say but can't because of "lawyers." There's a reason that teams usually go with some variation of "no comment" when talking about legal situations.
There's also the whole dealing with almost entirely "hostile" questions for an event that is usually a victory lap. Who would be entirely comfortable in that environment?
Peen...what the helll happened to that ZOOM call you claimed the Haslams were going to use to participate in Watson's news conference..?
Just another claim in an attempt that turns out to be completely false as some stoop to any low in an attempt to make the Haslams look like stand up folks that can be trusted...right?
How telling is it when the one person most responsible for this newest Browns mess refuses to even be seen with Watson on his introduction day...sad.
I said after. I can't help it you don't know what you are doing.
Is he really a creep? I'd say most guys like a pretty woman giving them a rub down.
Then you say this.....
Quote
I am not really sticking up for the guy as much as to say I wouldn't say it's creepy. For that matter, why is it not a bit "creepy" to rub down strangers?
Would you rub down a stranger? LOL...OK, not fair, not trying to put you on the spot...I am just saying to illustrate the point a bit.
You do realize you just stuck up for Watson by trying to place the blame on the accusers, right? The very thing you claimed you weren't doing. I've got news for you. We have a poster that is a female licensed massage therapist. If you would like to know who it is PM me. Then maybe you would like to explain this to her.
Go take a hike. I didn't do any such thing. I was turning things on a comment Oober said. I don't need to PM you for squat. I know who she is, she is a friend of mine. I talked to her when she went to school. We both like astronomy and aquariums. You know her from Taggerts.
As usual the local media was looking for sensational headlines. Using “attacking” questions will never create open and honest answers. Nobody opens up when the atmosphere is a little bit hostile.
Weird. I thought the local media did an excellent job asking tough, direct questions as they should have done.
As someone that, in general and as a rule, always expects the worst from Cleveland local media, I thought they did a pretty good job with asking direct-yet-not-sensational questions. They generally seemed to be asking the right questions and not pulling punches.
Yet many of us were fans no matter what right up until this happened. And if you want to talk about spin, stop acting like those supporting watson aren't doing the same thing. So all of you're "they hate Haslam" BS doesn't fly. If that were the reason we wouldn't have been supporting this team right up until they traded for watson.
So, you supported the team right up until the team traded for Watson.
Ok...why don't you say your good-byes, quit trolling the board and hit the dusty road?
Cool, you don't support the team any longer. Don't let the door hit you on the way out. I suppose if you want to post over in the smack shack that would be cool.
Jimmy is in promotion mode and Dee is in damage control mode. They are tag teaming the fan base.
Call it what you want, but they answered the questions. Some people have already made their minds up. Many here don't like the Haslams and will never give them the benefit of doubt. Many have drawn their own conclusions about Watson, and will never change their opinion. That's just the way of the world.
Those who don't like it, will continue to throw what ever spin they can come up with to bend the narrative their way. And those who feel otherwise will do the same. The only problem I have, is on these boards, many tend to attack those who disagree. There are a few, who thrive on forcing their opinion on others. It really has brought the quality of this board way down.
As for your comment, it is more than apparent, that your mind is made up that no matter what is said, or evidence is presented, you will never change your mind. That's okay, it's your right, but it doesn't necessarily mean you are right or wrong. But, as you expect others mto respect your opinion, you should also do the same.
My mind is not made up at all. I've actually been thinking what if this kid did nothing... But hey, you got me figured out, so why don't you just write my posts and PM them to me... Shut up.
Yet many of us were fans no matter what right up until this happened. And if you want to talk about spin, stop acting like those supporting watson aren't doing the same thing. So all of you're "they hate Haslam" BS doesn't fly. If that were the reason we wouldn't have been supporting this team right up until they traded for watson.
So, you supported the team right up until the team traded for Watson.
Ok...why don't you say your good-byes, quit trolling the board and hit the dusty road?
Cool, you don't support the team any longer. Don't let the door hit you on the way out. I suppose if you want to post over in the smack shack that would be cool.
I know you and others don't like being called out. You call that trolling because it makes you uncomfortable. Throwing shade on other makes you feel better about it. You have me confused with someone who gives a damn about that.
The door isn't going to hit me anywhere because I'm not going anywhere. You can either deal either that or not. Your choice.
I just like to state the facts because you don't adhere to the principles of innocent until proven guilty.
He may not have the best character but legally, he did nothing wrong, not yet.
You really don't know that. You refuse to consider that it's nearly impossible to prove a he said/she said case. You refuse to consider that the police considered them credible witnesses. You refuse to consider that the rate of bringing sexual cases like this is very low and the conviction rates are also low. So either you believe that the vast majority of women in this country are liars or you believe a lot of people who do such things get away with it. Either you believe all of these women are lying or you don't. Like I said, no matter how many times this explained to you, all you have is the same old line.
I know Jimmy denied being the one to put the adult comment out there. I'll come right out and say it: I'd like some posters to act like adults.
It would have been nice if there had been a little more football, like this forum is supposed to be about, in the press conference, but it went about how I expected. The standard hot take media approach that makes me not want to turn on the television.
So either you believe that the vast majority of women in this country are liars
Where do you come up with that? Who thinks that? I don't believe that. I don't think anyone thinks the majority of women, let alone Vast majority are liars.
Yet many of us were fans no matter what right up until this happened. And if you want to talk about spin, stop acting like those supporting watson aren't doing the same thing. So all of you're "they hate Haslam" BS doesn't fly. If that were the reason we wouldn't have been supporting this team right up until they traded for watson.
So, you supported the team right up until the team traded for Watson.
Ok...why don't you say your good-byes, quit trolling the board and hit the dusty road?
Cool, you don't support the team any longer. Don't let the door hit you on the way out. I suppose if you want to post over in the smack shack that would be cool.
I know you and others don't like being called out. You call that trolling because it makes you uncomfortable. Throwing shade on other makes you feel better about it. You have me confused with someone who gives a damn about that.
The door isn't going to hit me anywhere because I'm not going anywhere. You can either deal either that or not. Your choice.
I don't mind being called out. I do mind when you start twisting things as you play your games.
If you aren't a fan of the team anymore, and you post things to put the team and owners down, that is trolling. You and people like Curly are one and the same.
I just like to state the facts because you don't adhere to the principles of innocent until proven guilty.
He may not have the best character but legally, he did nothing wrong, not yet.
You really don't know that. You refuse to consider that it's nearly impossible to prove a he said/she said case. You refuse to consider that the police considered them credible witnesses. You refuse to consider that the rate of bringing sexual cases like this is very low and the conviction rates are also low. So either you believe that the vast majority of women in this country are liars or you believe a lot of people who do such things get away with it. Either you believe all of these women are lying or you don't. Like I said, no matter how many times this explained to you, all you have is the same old line.
Or one simply believe these women could be lying and are waiting for the evidence to indicate one way or the other. The world has lots of liars. Finding 22 would hardly be an onerous task. Telling people they could be in line for large cash settlements could probably create even more.
Again I'm not saying they are all lying, but nothing's been presented that has convinced me that they couldn't be. Some evidence has been presented that supports the idea that some of them could be.
When it comes to sexual crimes being committed against them, the numbers don't lie. mgh reported the percentage of times that perpetrators accused of sexual crimes actually made it to a trial. He also posted the conviction rates of those who actually ever made it to trial. In both cases the percentages were very low. So I repeat, either you think most of these women are liars or you think there's a lot of men who are guilty of sexual crimes that are never brought to justice. It's a math thing. You are also well aware of how difficult it is to convict a he said/she said case which helps explain a lot about those percentages
If you aren't a fan of the team anymore, and you post things to put the team and owners down, that is trolling. You and people like Curly are one and the same.
Whatever you have to do to make yourself feel better Peen.
Could you explain to me where I'm putting any other Browns players down besides Watson? And why weren't you telling people this when Haslam was being called on the carpet for ripping off all those truck drivers?
Numbers don't lie, but they can mislead. When talking about specific instances, the numbers have no bearing on whether an individual is lying or truthful. The numbers can also change over time. Just because a particular data point would be outside the expected range doesn't make it an invalid observation.
Pit, I know all of that. I am not so much siding with the guy, but I won't hold anything against him. I feel sorry for women who are attacked and feel badly for guys who are falsely accused.
It is what is. No sense talking about it much. All that is going to do is get people who generally get along in to people who don't get along. I am done, at least for now.
I don't think there's really that much to talk about in regards to football. Dude is an elite QB. There's no question about that.
(this was in response to the question on why there weren't more football questions in the press conference)
Add: I think there was one question to Stefanski on how they're going to integrate Deshaun into the O, and even with that one question, KS just kinda punted it.
Trying to minimize the importance of the numbers doesn't change anything. The inference that you can't take the word of any of 22 women flies in the face of logic. But you keep doing you.
I clarified my post as it was in response to Bull's question about the PC questions.
Beyond that, please stop. This thread (and it's predecessor) has only been about the sex assault side of Watson. That's 16 or 17 pages of message board in 6-7 days. Nobody is shutting down anything, and saying that shows how far you're distorting reality to fuel this White Knight fantasy of yours.
I know you and others don't like being called out. You call that trolling because it makes you uncomfortable. Throwing shade on other makes you feel better about it. You have me confused with someone who gives a damn about that.
The door isn't going to hit me anywhere because I'm not going anywhere. You can either deal either that or not. Your choice.
Let me get this right. You're no longer a fan of the Browns, but you're just sticking around on a Browns message board to "call out" Browns fans that don't agree with you and teach them a lesson?
DW IS the offense. KS hopes he can ramp up an offense to take advantage go this Golden Child. I see the play caller as our weakest link offensively. Should be interesting.
Numbers don't lie, but they can mislead. When talking about specific instances, the numbers have no bearing on whether an individual is lying or truthful. The numbers can also change over time. Just because a particular data point would be outside the expected range doesn't make it an invalid observation.
Somewhere between 2 and 22 will come a critical point where is just to much.
Coming forward and accusing someone for sexual assault is one of the most difficult thing a women can do without having solid evidence. As father that saw his own daughter being part of such a process I know what it means being mistrusted, even some of her so called own friends started to question her story. That’s hard to take as a young women who hasn’t experienced how evil some of the community can be.
Trying to minimize the importance of the numbers doesn't change anything. The inference that you can't take the word of any of 22 women flies in the face of logic. But you keep doing you.
You are assuming that the 22 women are a representative sample of the larger overall population of sexual misconduct accusers. This is a logical fallacy. This assumption is unsubstantiated and in some of the cases appears to be contraindicated.
Numbers don't lie, but they can mislead. When talking about specific instances, the numbers have no bearing on whether an individual is lying or truthful. The numbers can also change over time. Just because a particular data point would be outside the expected range doesn't make it an invalid observation.
Somewhere between 2 and 22 will come a critical point where is just to much.
Coming forward and accusing someone for sexual assault is one of the most difficult thing a women can do without having solid evidence. As father that saw his own daughter being part of such a process I know what it means being mistrusted, even some of her so called own friends started to question her story. That’s hard to take as a young women who hasn’t experienced how evil some of the community can be.
Over reliance on anecdotal evidence is another logical fallacy. I empathize with you and your daughter's experience. It's horrible that you both had to go through that. I agree with everything in your final paragraph. However, each of these 22 situations is it's own unique entity and could or could not correspond with the lived experience of any sexual assault accuser. There may be evidence that some or all made their claims for monetary gain. That's also disgusting in my eyes. There are many people in the world that do/have done bad things. It can be hard to discern who those people are. It's even harder without access to all the facts. Assumptions and appearances can be wrong.
2 grand juries declined to indict. maybe there exist a multiverse where he's guilty, but it doesn't appear to be this one.
it didn't matter what anybody on the browns would've said today that could change people's minds. if you think he's guilty, then that's something you gotta figure out on your own. but until he charged with something, what did you expect?
i'm glad we got Watson. i'm glad the FO didn't wait around, letting another team potentially get him first. if the FO would've listened to people in the media and on this board, they would've got trashed anyway because they let another team land a franchise QB while we sat around and did nothing. so far, looks like whatever research the FO did is accurate, because again, GJ's aren't even bothering to charge him with anything.
Folks act like they are being forced to root for the Browns against their will. You are not imprisoned. No one is making you follow the team. If you are so morally disgusted by Watson and Browns, you are free to root for another team or no team at all. So stop w/the phony dramatics. Most of the posters who are spinning the moral web are only doing so because they are upset about Baker.
What's crazy is that I left this board and watched this past season's games. w/disgust because I was sick of Baker and his fan base. No one made me root for the Browns. No one made me stay on the board. We have free choice to leave if we are disgusted. The phony facade that some of you are putting forth is not working.
I thought Watson was definitely worth going after if he got thru the legal issues. Then when it looked like we were getting serious, I decided he wasn't worth the headache and drama signing him would bring and was relieved when they said we were out of the running. I was OK with a healthy Baker starting next year, and then Baker goes and demands to be traded. (I thought I read somewhere that he said he wouldn't play for the Browns ever again, but I can't find anything and I could be wrong.) Then we're back to Watson. He's now a Brown and I'm a Browns fan. So far, I haven't seen where there's any proof that he committed a crime. Just 2 of the 22 accusations are claiming sexual assault, and one of those initially said that what happened was consentual and tried to extort 30k from Watson. I want to see the depositions and evidence before I pass any judgment. All we have now is hearsay. I'm not going to hang the guy because some attorney rounded up 22 people, people who had no intentions of pursuing litigation, to file civil lawsuits.
Numbers don't lie, but they can mislead. When talking about specific instances, the numbers have no bearing on whether an individual is lying or truthful. The numbers can also change over time. Just because a particular data point would be outside the expected range doesn't make it an invalid observation.
Somewhere between 2 and 22 will come a critical point where is just to much.
Coming forward and accusing someone for sexual assault is one of the most difficult thing a women can do without having solid evidence. As father that saw his own daughter being part of such a process I know what it means being mistrusted, even some of her so called own friends started to question her story. That’s hard to take as a young women who hasn’t experienced how evil some of the community can be.
Over reliance on anecdotal evidence is another logical fallacy. I empathize with you and your daughter's experience. It's horrible that you both had to go through that. I agree with everything in your final paragraph. However, each of these 22 situations is it's own unique entity and could or could not correspond with the lived experience of any sexual assault accuser. There may be evidence that some or all made their claims for monetary gain. That's also disgusting in my eyes. There are many people in the world that do/have done bad things. It can be hard to discern who those people are. It's even harder without access to all the facts. Assumptions and appearances can be wrong.
Thanks!
From a sports perspective I'm trilled we got Watson. I saw the press conference and he gave a good impression except the "he didn't regret" thing that I found creepy.
My take away. He could have had sex with these women without doing some illegal, but at the same time he could also have acted without respect by using his fame and male power to do something they felt uncomfortable with. It's possible to have these two parallel thoughts in our heads and come to the conclusion that he's legally innocent but at the same time acting creepy and morally incorrect in these situations. There is no conflict in these two conclusions.
What I'm against is when we dismiss these womens stories and start to question their character and their motives. That's not necessary and unworthy us as Browns supporters. Thats why I repeatedly stand up for these women without knowing who's right or wrong.
I will say this about the situation. Today's press conference was hard for me to watch. The media went after Berry and Watson hard. There were some things that neither party could answer because there are civil cases that have not been concluded.
I do feel that there is going to be a ton of negative attention on Watson and the Browns. I don't watch sports for controversy. I love the game. I don't want politics, religion, race, social issues, or legal matters to be the focus. I enjoy escaping from those everyday issues when I watch sports. But, I know this story is not going away. There will be a cloud over the team for quite some time.
Unlike some, I will not indict either side. I will not say the attorney is trying to make millions off of Watson. I will not say the Texans put him up to it after Watson said he wanted a trade. I will not say that racism ran rampant in the Texans' organization and that is why Watson wanted out. I will not say that the massage therapists are trying to exploit Watson. I won't say any of those things because I do not know the truth. I am not going to be on some sort of crusade to slander one side or the other. I don't condone that type of reasoning. For example, why I think Baker stinks as a qb and I don't like his character, there is a reason I have not jumped on the CheeseCake parking lot and having sex w/Higgens' woman rumors. I have no idea if they are true or not and I will not slander Baker's name for such accusations. Honor knows where and when to draw the line.
I think this part is important......so, for those of you who like my posts....please consider this. I believe some people are so maniacal about their beliefs that they feel this need to relentlessly attack those who don't agree w/them. It's the primary reason I left this board a year and a half ago. I never understood why it is so important to get others to agree w/you. State your case and live w/it. Why do people need approval from others to justify their stance?
And yet here you are telling others how to post. Telling us what the Baker fans think and want. Telling us why others have stated their opinions and telling us their motives. Telling us what threads should be allowed and where.
Lots of good football talk since you have been back - but lots of the stuff that does not fall into "state your case and live with it" .
I don't watch a lot of sport shows and don't listen to a lot either especially outside of football season ... but Rich Eisen impresses me when i hear him and he has been very genuine and on the money with his takes on the current Browns situation. Thanks for sharing.
I just finished watching the Rich Eisen vid, and I gotta say, I'm actually depressed.
Only the Cleveland Browns could manage to acquire their first franchise QB since Otto Graham, and do so under a cloud of mess, stink, shade and controversy. Like I said in my only other DW post, I will probably watch this team make it to a SB with this guy, and even if they win, I will probably view it with an asterisk attached. And I effing hate that.
Browns just picked up a top 5 NFL QB, and possibly solidified their spot as a perennial playoff team for the next 5-8 years, and I can't get happy about it at all. I should be doing handsprings after all these years of futility, but I can't get past how stank all of this feels.
These muffs make it so, so hard to be a happy fan. Always something to make me shake my head.
"My mind is not made up at all. I've actually been thinking what if this kid did nothing... But hey, you got me figured out, so why don't you just write my posts and PM them to me... Shut up."
Sorry I didn't word things right. I'm not trying to put anybody down, and I sure don't mean any harm. But your posts have been totally negative in one direction. I will shut up and never reply to you again. Have a nice day
I’m tired of this damn argument. Until something new comes up in terms of the legal stuff, it is futile to go back and forth, everybody stating their opinion over and over again.
I liked Baker, but he wasn’t consistent enough. DW is a clear upgrade, he’s my QB and if people don’t like my stance, I don’t care. If it comes out that he is an absolute piece of trash human being, I’ll change my mind.
I wish one of the reporters had asked him how he feels about being away from the game for a season and how he will address any rustiness, or thoughts on the talent he’ll have around him. I did notice that when he answered a question, he looked the reporter in the eye. Might not mean much but that’s what I noticed.
I just finished watching the Rich Eisen vid, and I gotta say, I'm actually depressed.
Only the Cleveland Browns could manage to acquire their first franchise QB since Otto Graham, and do so under a cloud of mess, stink, shade and controversy. Like I said in my only other DW post, I will probably watch this team make it to a SB with this guy, and even if they win, I will probably view it with an asterisk attached. And I effing hate that.
Browns just picked up a top 5 NFL QB, and possibly solidified their spot as a perennial playoff team for the next 5-8 years, and I can't get happy about it at all. I should be doing handsprings after all these years of futility, but I can't get past how stank all of this feels.
These muffs make it so, so hard to be a happy fan. Always something to make me shake my head.
.02
You know where I stand on the sexual predator issues, but the more I read and hear, none of this seems quite right. From “victims” supposedly saying they wanted to get paid, two juries declining to charge, to DW's constant denial with zero evidence that he is taking anything but the clear my name route through this... It all has me wondering if this kid did a thing. I just can't see how it all happened almost at once. But then there is his butting heads over “racist ownership” that only slightly preceded the allegations, IIRC. Could this be a coordinated attack on him over that? I just don't know...
Then Rich Eisen says he was a model player and member of the community. AND HE DRIVES THE POINT, like the kid is/was a saint. These have to be considered.
So I have gone from being furious, to open to the facts, and now doubting his guilt or at least open to him being innocence. Yet, I still feel exactly like you. So, just going to wait and see too, I guess.
Extortion has always been a part of the business model of the sex industry. Sensual masseurs, strippers, lap dancers, escorts are IMHO part of the sex industry.
All man should be aware of the risks, in all situations dealing with sexual or quasi sexual services, its the nature of the game.
Don't ever get drunk, or go drunk into an adult place. Be sure to leave if any of your mates gets drunk and wants to party in this type of places. Don't touch anyone, don't talk to anyone unless you want and are willing to pay.
Its nothing new in sports, its actually part of the appeal of being a famous player.
In my eyes so far, I don't see Watson has a sex predator, but has a sex addict
Extortion has always been a part of the business model of the sex industry. Sensual masseurs, strippers, lap dancers, escorts are IMHO part of the sex industry.
All man should be aware of the risks, in all situations dealing with sexual or quasi sexual services, its the nature of the game.
Don't ever get drunk, or go drunk into an adult place. Be sure to leave if any of your mates gets drunk and wants to party in this type of places. Don't touch anyone, don't talk to anyone unless you want and are willing to pay.
Its nothing new in sports, its actually part of the appeal of being a famous player.
In my eyes so far, I don't see Watson has a sex predator, but has a sex addict
Is he a sex addict? Or has he just regularly been offered more sex by more attractive women than everyone on the board put together?
When he talked about social media being a factor, it got me thinking. It seems like everyone assumes that DeShaun was the one seeking these massage therapists out. While that's a possibility and may be true in some instances, it seems to me that in most cases social media makes it easier for average Joes/Janes to connect with celebrities than vice versa. For a massage therapist, an NFL QB would be a catch. One could be put on retainer/salary instead of working on an assembly line-like series of appointments. In the modern digital environment, entertainers/online "service providers" bring in most of their money by seeking out "patrons."
I think it would be enlightening to see the direct messages Watson and the women exchanged. They could have been initiated by Watson asking for services. It could also have started with a "Try my services, and we'll see what happens" from the other side.
It's been indicated that many of the women have scrubbed their social media accounts. If this is truly the case, it begs the question why?
While most players don't have multiple massage therapists, most players don't have 1.5 million followers on Instagram.
The presser didn't change my mind,, I think where there is smoke, there is fire...reminds me of the saying that nothing good happens when you are out at 3 am.. All that's meant to teach us is, "Don't put yourself in a position to get in trouble"
If he wanted legit massages, he should have used the resources that I'm sure the Texans had available... for me, it's clear he was looking for a "happy ending"!
Now, having said that, I do better understand the reasons they didn't speak to the women involved. Berry explained that and it seemed reasonable,. He also explained that they hired outside services to dig deep into the women and the allegations.
Of course, when asked if he thought Watson was innocent, Berry responded with "we believe in Deshaun"... would not say he thought he was innocent..
Also for me, Watson wasn't believable when discussing his legal issues...
Now, I have a question.
If two different grand juries wouldn't indict him, what is the league reviewing to decide if they should suspend him?
There’s no doubt that these dudes have FLOCKS of girls trying to get with them. I’m sure their DMs are flooded. That’s not saying he didn’t do inappropriate or immoral things, but I think there are examples of girls reaching out to athletes too.
So either you believe that the vast majority of women in this country are liars
Where do you come up with that? Who thinks that? I don't believe that. I don't think anyone thinks the majority of women, let alone Vast majority are liars.
well if we are to believe Watson then that would mean 22/22 (100% of women) are liars! this is how the law of averages work....
Most/if not all have JUDGED DW already....he alluded to that fact when he talked about his BRAND, sadly- too many of these guys are all about their brand- MONEY. It makes the world go round. Pats owner Kraft, he wasn't fined or suspended was he for his massage parlor incidents in Florida- Watson isn't some cheap player anymore- he's got hundreds of millions of dollars at his disposal- NFL fines or suspends him on he said/she said incidents with NO other real evidence- I don't care if ten thousand women claim he did something- money corrupts, and millions of women want a piece of what he's got.....NFL could be SUED bigtime.....sure hope football changes the news....GO Browns!!!
I know you and others don't like being called out. You call that trolling because it makes you uncomfortable. Throwing shade on other makes you feel better about it. You have me confused with someone who gives a damn about that.
The door isn't going to hit me anywhere because I'm not going anywhere. You can either deal either that or not. Your choice.
Let me get this straight. You're no longer a fan of the Browns, but you're just sticking around on a Browns message board to "call out" Browns fans that don't agree with you and teach them a lesson?
As you can plainly see, people have their minds made up. Watching the mental gymnastics people will have to go through as this all unfolds will be fun to watch. Nowhere in there did I so much as suggest teaching anyone anything. I have been friends with many people on this board for many years and in some cases decades. So no, I'm not going anywhere. Once again you've taken something away from a post that wasn't suggested or implied. I hope you have it straight now.
I have legal facts and results, you have nothing but emotional opinions.
When you consider the fact that people in prison get released because they end up proving their innocence and guilty men are sometimes never convicted, you have nothing.
Most of the posters who are spinning the moral web are only doing so because they are upset about Baker.
Yet another lie. But that's what you get when standing up for women who are sexually assaulted by a star athlete. Not only do the women get undermined, so do their supporters. It says more about the character of the attackers than anything else. Disgusting.
Quote
What's crazy is that I left this board and watched this past season's games. w/disgust because I was sick of Baker and his fan base.
Yeah, it's the same thing. Get a clue.
Quote
The phony facade that some of you are putting forth is not working.
I think anyone who can't see what a basic moral compass looks like has their own issues. And reading your post shows they're on full display.
Extortion has always been a part of the business model of the sex industry. Sensual masseurs, strippers, lap dancers, escorts are IMHO part of the sex industry.
All man should be aware of the risks, in all situations dealing with sexual or quasi sexual services, its the nature of the game.
And here we are back to the disgusting once again. The old, "every massage therapist is basically a prostitute or sex worker" stupidity. And nobody objected to these claims. What the hell happened to you people?
Pats owner Kraft, he wasn't fined or suspended was he for his massage parlor incidents in Florida-
Yes, a sleazy massage parlor known for happy endings. Where no woman accused him of sexual misconduct. You do realize that's the issue here don't you? It's not about sex or paying for sex. You do understand that's not the same thing, right?
Quote
I don't care if ten thousand women claim he did something-
Oh we're well aware. And then Bull Dawg would be telling us those numbers don't mean anything. We're all well aware.
I've touched on this point a couple of times...we don't know if the women who had their cases reviewed by the two Texas Grand Juries...are those the only women that Watson is alleged to have attempted sexual misconduct with during his message session?
Seems that it would be up to Watson to let the Browns know if there are more cases that have not been exposed to the public yet...then again, maybe the Browns already know the answer to that question...how many more cases..?
I'm not saying Watson is pure.....nobody but he and GOD knows the truth. You've judged him. A lot has been made about the 40 massage therapists. If you've been in Houston for 5yrs...quick math - he changed workers every 45 days. I wonder how many solicitations a single multimillionaire puts up with a week. Just saying, he's innocent until proven guilty......and we know lawyers are only after looking out for the best people....please Sidney "release the Kraken"....GO Browns!!!!
So either you believe that the vast majority of women in this country are liars
Where do you come up with that? Who thinks that? I don't believe that. I don't think anyone thinks the majority of women, let alone Vast majority are liars.
well if we are to believe Watson then that would mean 22/22 (100% of women) are liars! this is how the law of averages work....
Actually, the law of averages would indicate that if these women were all lying, the next woman to claim sexual misconduct would be more likely to be telling the truth. As Google puts it the law of averages is:
Quote
the principle that supposes most future events are likely to balance any past deviation from a presumed average.
If we are to believe Watson, these 22 women would be liars. Not all women. All women, all accusers, etc.- any group has variation within it. If you gathered a million apples, you'd likely be able to find 22 wormy, rotten apples. That doesn't mean all apples are wormy and rotten. The averages don't apply when picking specific apples. The question is, could Buzbee have gone looking for wormy apples? If that's the case, it's not an unbiased sample of the larger population.
I have legal facts and results, you have nothing but emotional opinions.
When you consider the fact that people in prison get released because they end up proving their innocence and guilty men are sometimes never convicted, you have nothing.
Honestly, it feels like you're the one not considering the first part of your own statement.
In your example, start at 2 and go up from there. Every time you go along the law of averages says the next one is more probable of being truthful. It's not a guarantee. Just odds. And proof numbers make a difference.
I've judged that 22 women aren't all lying. For me to believe differently I would have to come to the conclusion they all are lying. That's a much further stretch than what many seem to be supporting.
I disagree with the basic premise stated about the law of averages. If you flip a quarter and it lands heads up 22 times in a row, the odds that it will land heads up on the next flip is 50/50. It is unchanged by the previous 22 flips. If 22 people are lying about something and a 23rd person comes along, those 1st 22 have zero impact on whether that 23rd person is going to lie or tell the truth.
(Not saying any of the 22 accusing DW are lying. Basing my statements off the original premise presented earlier in this thread)
In your example, start at 2 and go up from there. Every time you go along the law of averages says the next one is more probable of being truthful. It's not a guarantee. Just odds. And proof numbers make a difference.
Except the law of averages is actually a spurious belief that is a variation of the gambler's fallacy. The odds of a particular event are independent of any previous unconnected event or set of events. You can flip a quarter 50 times and get 50 heads. The odds are unlikely, but the odds have no bearing on what actually happens. The "odds" are even less reliable when looking at things that aren't purely chance. Each individual involved in a sexual assault case is different, the probability of each woman being truthful or lying varies. People involved in sexual assault cases can have vastly different motivations. These aren't random hypothetical situations. These are actual events with evidence to support or gainsay them.
According to you, all jfan would need to do is find 22 people to say that.
You mean he would have to go out and "find them". There would be no pattern, no timeline. I guess one could believe that this attorney sought out a bunch of women willing to lie, fed them a story to repeat, synchronize all of their stories to fit into a pattern and timeline then try to convince people it happened. But as you can see, that's a pretty far fetched conclusion to reach.
And I notice you have never taken a stand on the situation. Why is that? Anything you would like to say? Or are you just here to make a comment without taking a stand either way? Seems to be what you have done this far.
And the point is, that even if a few of them are telling the truth that's enough. I haven't seen anyone claim they're all telling the truth. Just that all 22 of them aren't lying. Your three ring circus of trying to make that sound like a logical possibility is nothing short of ridiculous.
You mean he's doing the same thing these women have done?
Not unless you've chosen to call all 22 of them liars. Which seems to be what your post is indicating. Their evidence is their experiences. It seems you have chosen to advocate on the side that denies all of their validity in favor of the validity of DW. That defies a logical conclusion.
So your conclusion is that all 22 of these women are lying? Because you've never said a word bout this side of the discussion. And still haven't. I take it you were good at dodge ball in school?
This came across my twitter timeline most likely because of someone I follow, but I'm a a quarter of the way through it and think it is a good listen to share. It's a lawyer answering questions regarding the case from his opinion and experience and, so far, it comes across as pretty unbiased considering his twitter account says he is a Browns' fan. Admittedly, I do not know anything about Moohead radio but apparently, it is Browns-specific amateur talk show so feel free to judge the source of this interview as you deem fit. The lawyer, based out of DC, seems very measured from what I gather so far. Anyways, feel free to listen. Oh, and if anyone knows about Moorhead radio (weird name) I'd be curious to know more about this channel.
You mean he's doing the same thing these women have done?
Not unless you've chosen to call all 22 of them liars. Which seems to be what your post is indicating. Their evidence is their experiences. It seems you have chosen to advocate on the side that denies all of their validity in favor of the validity of DW. That defies a logical conclusion.
My intention was to illustrate the inconsistency of your logic. I wasn't making a declaration of my belief because I don't yet have a firm one.
I'm not on a side. I'm seeing that both sides appear possible. At first glance, Watson lying seemed more possible. The more I dig, the more murky the other side gets.
I don't think you understand the difference between logic and probability.
Quote
logic is concerned with absolutely certain truths and inferences, whereas probability theory deals with uncertainties.
So either you believe that the vast majority of women in this country are liars
Where do you come up with that? Who thinks that? I don't believe that. I don't think anyone thinks the majority of women, let alone Vast majority are liars.
well if we are to believe Watson then that would mean 22/22 (100% of women) are liars! this is how the law of averages work....
Actually, the law of averages would indicate that if these women were all lying, the next woman to claim sexual misconduct would be more likely to be telling the truth. As Google puts it the law of averages is:
Quote
the principle that supposes most future events are likely to balance any past deviation from a presumed average.
If we are to believe Watson, these 22 women would be liars. Not all women. All women, all accusers, etc.- any group has variation within it. If you gathered a million apples, you'd likely be able to find 22 wormy, rotten apples. That doesn't mean all apples are wormy and rotten. The averages don't apply when picking specific apples. The question is, could Buzbee have gone looking for wormy apples? If that's the case, it's not an unbiased sample of the larger population.
My complaint is not with people that don't believe that the 22 are lying. It's the people that are stating that 22 women can't be lying that I find illogical.
I disagree with the basic premise stated about the law of averages. If you flip a quarter and it lands heads up 22 times in a row, the odds that it will land heads up on the next flip is 50/50. It is unchanged by the previous 22 flips. If 22 people are lying about something and a 23rd person comes along, those 1st 22 have zero impact on whether that 23rd person is going to lie or tell the truth.
(Not saying any of the 22 accusing DW are lying. Basing my statements off the original premise presented earlier in this thread)
Well - your example is correct. If you flip the coin 22 times and they are all heads - the next toss is still absolutely 50/50.
But with regards to starting at 2 - what are the odds of the next 20 being heads in a row. That would be a better analogy here.
And we aren't talking about a coin - this is people and lives. I get the impression that folks think it would be easy to flippantly lie about this and carry on life as normal. I would think every person who made this allegation has had their life turned upside down.
I disagree with the basic premise stated about the law of averages. If you flip a quarter and it lands heads up 22 times in a row, the odds that it will land heads up on the next flip is 50/50. It is unchanged by the previous 22 flips. If 22 people are lying about something and a 23rd person comes along, those 1st 22 have zero impact on whether that 23rd person is going to lie or tell the truth.
(Not saying any of the 22 accusing DW are lying. Basing my statements off the original premise presented earlier in this thread)
Well - your example is correct. If you flip the coin 22 times and they are all heads - the next toss is still absolutely 50/50.
But with regards to starting at 2 - what are the odds of the next 20 being heads in a row. That would be a better analogy here.
And we aren't talking about a coin - this is people and lives. I get the impression that folks think it would be easy to flippantly lie about this and carry on life as normal. I would think every person who made this allegation has had their life turned upside down.
It's not that folks think it would be easy to lie and go back to normal life. It's more the idea that people under 30 aren't always known for considering the consequences of their actions. This is the same generation that made the Tide Pod challenge a thing. Mix in a smooth talking lawyer putting images of dollar signs in their heads. Finding 22 people willing to bend the truth doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility.
Throw in the number of cases and apparent complete lack of evidence supporting it, consider the alleged evidence against their version of events and the grand jury decisions, and the potential of their lying seems increasingly possible - if far from definite.
It occurs to me the NFL may take the position that they will wait until the civil suits are settled or adjudicated before enacting a suspension, giving themselves the latitude to delay suspension until next year when the economic impact is greater, in light of the attention the low first-year salary has received. Any thoughts on this? Sorry if too astray from the thread discussion.
Well that's reasonable to an extent, some youths are less likely to consider all the ramifications of a situation. I think branding them all with that label would be wrong.
Bottom line is that it is entirely possibility that some of the 22 are telling the truth and that the truth will never be proven. There is also a possibility that Watson is entirely innocent and the victim of an elaborate sting and all 22 allegations are false - personally I believe that to be the smaller of the two possibilities. What isn't up for debate is Watson using over 40 different massage therapists and looking for sexual services from most of them. As others have said - time to move on. But to reiterate a point that Pit has made - the willingness and presumption of many to insinuate that licensed massage therapists should be viewed as virtual sex workers without standing and automatically to be dismissed is nauseating and says everything about any individual espousing those views and nothing about the women themselves. I know that's not what you have said - but that view has been widely expressed across many forum boards.
But to reiterate a point that Pit has made - the willingness and presumption of many to insinuate that licensed massage therapists should be viewed as virtual sex workers without standing and automatically to be dismissed is nauseating
I've been debating about posting this memory ever since the DW stories dropped. It goes back 2 decades. This was my invitation.
__________
I took a call to play a series of engagements in Detroit. It was a Motown Soul/Gospel/R&B/Jazz review. A major project- lucrative enough that I took a week off from my main job to be a part of Music History. Several reading sessions, 3 intensive rehearsals, followed by 3 days of studio recording sessions and 2 concerts at the Fox Theater. When you spend that much time with the same folks, strangers become colleagues. Some colleagues become friends.
I met a young violist that week. Her uncle was the Jazz legend, Sir Roland Hannah. We're chatting during rehearsal break, and she tells me that viola was a love that she didn't want to pursue full-time, because of her uncle's stories of how grueling The Life can be. Instead, she loved playing only the gigs that she wanted to.
I ask her: "So- if you don't play The Life.... what do you do?"
"I'm a licensed Deep-tissue Massage Therapist." "Wow. I've never met a masseuse before..."
"-And you still haven't. I apply medical manipulation to specific muscle groups. I'm a health care worker. A masseuse wears a bikini-"
I innocently (no- ignorantly) walked into that exchange, because I was oblivious of a distinction. I'm no longer innocent or ignorant.
I will continue to defend these 22 women’s right to have their cases heard in a fair and unbiased way without them being questioned and marginalized all over the place.
The number 230 million tells me that it’s a high probability that someone is orchestrating a disinformation and smear campaign. Maybe together with a “unknown” organization/owner/law firm that also has interest in that these women’s credibility is as low as possible in the public opinion. Ask yourself who benefits most if these women being crushed. Judging from what I’m reading at this place and on many other social media platforms they seems to have a relative high success rate among some men who maybe don’t like independent women who don’t accept being treated like prostitutes and without some decency.
Strong words but as elder man, a husband and a father of four daughters I’m embarrassed that many Browns supporters has such Stone Age view of what it means to be cornered and participating in something they feel uncomfortable with by someone with more power, money and reputation. Who will believe in a young massage therapist when she questioning the local hero who’s adored by hundred of thousand men? Listening to Andrew Berry and his stuttering at the press conference was bad enough, what a total train wreck of weak explanations.
But to reiterate a point that Pit has made - the willingness and presumption of many to insinuate that licensed massage therapists should be viewed as virtual sex workers without standing and automatically to be dismissed is nauseating
I've been debating about posting this memory ever since the DW stories dropped. It goes back 2 decades. This was my invitation.
__________
I took a call to play a series of engagements in Detroit. It was a Motown Soul/Gospel/R&B/Jazz review. A major project- lucrative enough that I took a week off from my main job to be a part of Music History. Several reading sessions, 3 intensive rehearsals, followed by 3 days of studio recording sessions and 2 concerts at the Fox Theater. When you spend that much time with the same folks, strangers become colleagues. Some colleagues become friends.
I met a young violist that week. Her uncle was the Jazz legend, Sir Roland Hannah. We're chatting during rehearsal break, and she tells me that viola was a love that she didn't want to pursue full-time, because of her uncle's stories of how grueling The Life can be. Instead, she loved playing only the gigs that she wanted to.
I ask her: "So- if you don't play The Life.... what do you do?"
"I'm a licensed Deep-tissue Massage Therapist." "Wow. I've never met a masseuse before..."
"-And you still haven't. I apply medical manipulation to specific muscle groups. I'm a health care worker. A masseuse wears a bikini-"
I innocently (no- ignorantly) walked into that exchange, because I was oblivious of a distinction. I'm no longer innocent or ignorant.
The distinction defines the difference.
Well, that was pretty clear.. Thanks Clem.
You know it occurs to me that the only person saying all 22 women lied is Watson.
"The number 230 million tells me that it’s a high probability that someone is orchestrating a disinformation and smear campaign. Maybe together with a “unknown” organization/owner/law firm that also has interest in that these women’s credibility is as low as possible in the public opinion. Ask yourself who benefits most if these women being crushed."
I see what you are saying, it could easily be just the opposite. Very rich young athlete is targeted by someone looking for financial gain. Maybe one or two of the women had a bad experience with Watson, so the lawyer investigates who else had interactions with him. They devise a plan to get together and for a story that could lead to big financial gains for all. Also, none of these women have been "crushed", and their identities are not even talked about. But Watson's character has been and still is being attacked daily. Who's to say that someone in the Texans organization isn't behind this? None of it came out until he wanted out.
My scenario is hypothetical just like yours. It is not what I believe, I want to make that clear. But just as easy as it is to say Watson isn't being truthful, and can be deduced that maybe those bringing the charges are not being truthful.
My feeling is that something took place, but at what extent? Two grand juries came to the same conclusion, and that is all I have to go on.
I ask her: "So- if you don't play The Life.... what do you do?"
"I'm a licensed Deep-tissue Massage Therapist." "Wow. I've never met a masseuse before..."
"-And you still haven't. I apply medical manipulation to specific muscle groups. I'm a health care worker. A masseuse wears a bikini-"
As this relates to DW, most of the accusers were not licensed massage therapists though. I'd like to see the Instagram ads showing how the services were advertised. I really can't wait for this civil trial to see the evidence and what the actual depositions say. I'm trying to be open minded about this, looking at what we actually know from both sides. I believe the media headlines are really skewing things. Like calling it a "sexual assault trial" when only 2 of the accusers are actually claiming sexual assault. Everywhere you look, the article will say 22 massage therapists are filing suit, when actually only 8 or nine of the accusers are actually massage therapists. When the few actual facts we have in this case need to be distorted like that, it's cause for concern. I'm also looking at the fact that not one of these accusers filed a complaint until they were contacted by Buzbee.
You do have to look at the fact that there are 22 people accusing DW of wrongdoing, and that the Texan employee that arranged some of his massages plead the 5th. I don't think there's any doubt that DW was looking for sexual encounters when he booked massages thru Instagram, and he admitted they took place.
Were actual crimes committed? Being a Browns fan isn't easy.
I was against signing DW. Baker would be fine, if healthy, imo.
Which in no way addresses the topic of the allegations against him, yet again. Which I expected. . Once again arch it seems you still have a problem understanding punctuation. A question mark means someone is asking you a question. A statement would be required to accuse you of saying something or putting words in your mouth.
My feeling is that something took place, but at what extent? Two grand juries came to the same conclusion, and that is all I have to go on.
And getting a indictment from a grand jury is high, like 98.5% high or higher. If the grand jury sends back a no bill, the evidence is as flimsy as it gets, or non-existent. On a 12 person panel, all states are different, but 1/3 voting true can send something to trial.
In many of the no bill cases, the DA may not have even pursued the issue except for the optics of the matter.
That sounds great if these allegations had been made after he signed that contract. But that's not how it happened. He was still rich if that's your point. But the "230 million" part is factually bogus.
Quote
Maybe together with a “unknown” organization/owner/law firm that also has interest in that these women’s credibility is as low as possible in the public opinion. Ask yourself who benefits most if these women being crushed."
Probably the same group of people they used to steal the election.
As for the owner of the Texans. Let's look at that for just a second since that's one of the conspiracy theories being floated around. If you had a top 5 QB that you felt may force your hand into trading him, why would you want to make up some crazy story that might diminish his value? Why would you want to decrease the competition among other teams because some teams may actually care about the morality factor here?
Attempting to devalue an asset makes no sense. Then of course there's the other theory when an attorney rounded up 22 random women who all just "happened to" be called by Watson for massages and coordinate a concocted story that provides a timeline and repeated similar and escalating offense. Yeah, that makes sense. lol
Then one would have to ignore that having this many message therapists is triple and quadruple what other NFL players have.
Lastly but not least is the latest crazy twist. "DW must be a sex addict". Yeah, sure.....
If this were actually true he would be calling escort services, not massage therapists. But people somehow can't differentiate who you would call to get a hooker and who you would call to get a massage.
In other words, "Well he didn't assault all of them so he must not have assaulted any of them."
No different than saying, "he didn't assault all of them, but he must have assaulted some of them".
Actually it's not even close to the same thing. But I think you know that. For it to not to be any different I would have to believe that those saying he didn't assault them were all liars. That a lawyer tried to concoct a story, get all of those women to lie and claim he didn't assault them. The mental gymnastics it would take to come to that conclusion is quite different.
Yeah, nobody knows if all 22 women are lying or not. I mean they're massage therapists right? If someone thinks that's a remote possibility of what actually happened they're convincing themselves of opening their minds to terrible odds.
22 accused him of sexual assault... some of those 22 admitted they lied.[/quote]
I'm pretty sure that is not accurate. I don't know the actual number, but IIRC only a few accused him of the "crime of sexual assault", again IIRC most accused him of harassment or crimes less to that degree. I know it doesn't make it right so please don't jump om my statement for that, but this is why there is so much disinformation in the world.
Posters have written numerous "possibilities" of what happened between DW and the 22. Some are more plausible than others but none are so bazaar that those scenarios could not have happened. After the Duke case I wait until everything is known, at least until it seems like all info is out there that will be. I don't like what he is accused of, but I also didn't like a lot of what some other guys have done who have played for the Browns the past couple decades. Hopefully time will sort this out.
I will be a Browns fan going forward. Someone else pointed out the other day, if you stop being a Browns fans over this, but continue to watch the NFL or choose another team, your moral outrage is far too limited. IF DW were to remain with Houston and you still watched the NFL, your outrage is a bit narrow.
Now the narrative will that the 18 were paid to back him, and this is a ploy to clear him. I'll sit back and wait, I'm sure the usual suspects already have made this conclusion. Just like the ones who claimed the Haslams were hiding during the press conference, until they did a press conference.
Now the narrative will that the 18 were paid to back him, and this is a ploy to clear him. I'll sit back and wait, I'm sure the usual suspects already have made this conclusion. Just like the ones who claimed the Haslams were hiding during the press conference, until they did a press conference.
That is also a distinct possibility. Things like that do happen. Not sure if cops would investigate that type allegation if the GJ is not longer convened & will be looking at it.
Now the narrative will that the 18 were paid to back him, and this is a ploy to clear him. I'll sit back and wait, I'm sure the usual suspects already have made this conclusion.
So making that claim about his accusers is fine, but if you see the same claims made in the other direction it's not fine? Hmmmmmm..
Anyone making that claim in either direction are being foolish. But it hasn't stopped a lot of people. And I didn't see you make an objection to it then. You only object to such a claim depending on which direction the accusation is directed. Why am I not surprised?
Here we go again with the Duke case. In the Duke case it was the word of one woman, not twenty two. But you keep comparing them because it makes it sound better. These two situations aren't even close to the same thing.
I will be a Browns fan going forward. Someone else pointed out the other day, if you stop being a Browns fans over this, but continue to watch the NFL or choose another team, your moral outrage is far too limited. IF DW were to remain with Houston and you still watched the NFL, your outrage is a bit narrow.
No offense, but neither you nor anybody else gets to define my fanhood, or degrees of "moral outrage" (your term, not mine). You're entitled to think what you will of my attitudes, but that's the extent of it.
Conflating probability and certainty is illogical. Ascribing population statistics to a sample whose distribution doesn't reflect the makeup of the larger group is illogical. Denying the possibility of the statistically improbable is illogical.
What you believe may be true. However, your argument is flawed.
I ask her: "So- if you don't play The Life.... what do you do?"
"I'm a licensed Deep-tissue Massage Therapist." "Wow. I've never met a masseuse before..."
"-And you still haven't. I apply medical manipulation to specific muscle groups. I'm a health care worker. A masseuse wears a bikini-"
As this relates to DW, most of the accusers were not licensed massage therapists though. I'd like to see the Instagram ads showing how the services were advertised. I really can't wait for this civil trial to see the evidence and what the actual depositions say. I'm trying to be open minded about this, looking at what we actually know from both sides. I believe the media headlines are really skewing things. Like calling it a "sexual assault trial" when only 2 of the accusers are actually claiming sexual assault. Everywhere you look, the article will say 22 massage therapists are filing suit, when actually only 8 or nine of the accusers are actually massage therapists. When the few actual facts we have in this case need to be distorted like that, it's cause for concern. I'm also looking at the fact that not one of these accusers filed a complaint until they were contacted by Buzbee.
You do have to look at the fact that there are 22 people accusing DW of wrongdoing, and that the Texan employee that arranged some of his massages plead the 5th. I don't think there's any doubt that DW was looking for sexual encounters when he booked massages thru Instagram, and he admitted they took place.
Were actual crimes committed? Being a Browns fan isn't easy.
I really don't want to post much more in this thread because it's creepy how some think they can tell others what to think, but this reply seems level-headed and objective to me. It would be nice to have intelligent conversations about topics such as this, but things are the way they are.
Yeah, nobody knows if all 22 women are lying or not. I mean they're massage therapists right? If someone thinks that's a remote possibility of what actually happened they're convincing themselves of opening their minds to terrible odds.
When some of them have already said that they lied and two grand juries decided to pass, I'd rather wait to see how the civil trial comes out before convicting the guy....
prior to these accusations Deshaun appeared to be a model NFL player...
Yeah, nobody knows if all 22 women are lying or not. I mean they're massage therapists right? If someone thinks that's a remote possibility of what actually happened they're convincing themselves of opening their minds to terrible odds.
When some of them have already said that they lied and two grand juries decided to pass, I'd rather wait to see how the civil trial comes out before convicting the guy....
prior to these accusations Deshaun appeared to be a model NFL player...
If you go to nightclubs over a span of a year or two and meet 50+ women and 22 of them afterwards complain about your behavior then you have a problem you must address. Maybe you’re not doing something illegal but the sheer volume of numbers should tell you that something you do isn’t appreciated by most women. If you don’t by this time understand that your social competence is letting you down then there is probably a huge risk that if you continue to interact in the same way with women something will probably in the future go to a place close to disaster. It’s not rocket science to understand and predict this.
Being a morally questionable individual isn’t illegal but at the same time it’s not exactly an asset if you’re going to be the poster boy of a NFL organization. Some of you don’t care as long as the Browns win games but for me and many others it’s problematic. It itches me and make me feel uncomfortable.
I want to like our QB. I want to like DeShaun Watson. I want to cheer with full joy whenever we win a game. Just like the rest of you. Unfortunately it’s hard to overcome Watson’s past history without becoming thoughtful. Every time I see one of my daughters or probably any other women when watching and cheering for the Browns I will lower my voice and maybe be a little less cheerful. That bothers me.
My best case scenario is if DeShaun Watson starts to show a little bit of remorse. Address publicly that he probably has a problem with interacting with women and accept that in these situations we all need some counseling and help. Nothing wrong with that and most women will easily accept such scenario instead him just trying to deny everything. It’s easier to forgive then to forget.
Never ever underestimate peoples willingness to forgive and at the same time our stubbornness to remember.
Here we go again with the Duke case. In the Duke case it was the word of one woman, not twenty two. But you keep comparing them because it makes it sound better. These two situations aren't even close to the same thing.
I think the Duke case is a great example to pay attention to. The main point being, wait until we know as much as possible, 1 accuser or 100. I am sure as heck not defending DW, nor am I calling the 22 liars, but if you don't see a parallel it sounds like you want him to be guilty.
I don't know how much you know about it, but when I first heard about it I was thinking but of rich kids taking advantage of a poor woman who has to strip to earn a living. I am sure when the news first came out if someone "guessed" maybe the DA invented evidence & DNA was lied about & the supposed victim was shown only Duke lacrosse players pics to ID and her initial physical description of the assaulters were not even close to the players identified.
By the way, I hate Duke and could care less about lacrosse.
I will be a Browns fan going forward. Someone else pointed out the other day, if you stop being a Browns fans over this, but continue to watch the NFL or choose another team, your moral outrage is far too limited. IF DW were to remain with Houston and you still watched the NFL, your outrage is a bit narrow.
No offense, but neither you nor anybody else gets to define my fanhood, or degrees of "moral outrage" (your term, not mine). You're entitled to think what you will of my attitudes, but that's the extent of it.
Dave, I have no idea of anything you have posted on here. IN fact, I had to check your sig to see how many posts you have made. I was stunned to see it was over 13,000 and if my life depended on it I couldn't recall your DT name. Only saying thus because you appear to have thought my point was directed at you. I can only assume I must have read some of what you posted in the past but my point was to posters that were unable to support the Browns because of the accusations against a player they traded for. I thought, if so, how can you watch any of teams that tried to trade for him at all. The NFL will eventually have to decide when he is able to play so the NFL admin will be allowing him to play. Of course no one has to listen to me and be fan of any team in particular. I haven't posted a lot about this because I am waiting for as much detail as possible to come out.
Jim Thome’s Wife Says Family is Canceling Browns Season Tickets After Deshaun Watson Trade JOSEPH SALVADOR7 HOURS AGO
Andrea Thome, the wife of former Cleveland baseball player Jim Thome, announced on Twitter that her family canceled their season tickets for Browns games Friday after the team introduced quarterback Deshaun Watson.
“Officially cancelled our Browns season tickets today and asked for a refund as they were paid in full,” she said in the tweet. “Very sad after 40 years as a fan, but this is my line in the sand. I believe women. Especially when there are 22 of them. That press conference did nothing to change my mind.”
Cleveland introduced Watson during a Friday press conference after a Harris County, Texas grand jury returned nine “no” bills on nine criminal complaints against Watson, who is still facing 22 active civil lawsuits that detail graphic accounts of sexual harassment and sexual assault that occurred during massage therapy sessions.
These accounts range from Watson refusing to cover his genitals to “touching [a plaintiff] with his penis and trying to force her to perform oral sex on him.” According to Jenny Vrentas of The New York Times, the criminal complaints he previously faced involved similar descriptions, including Watson’s ejaculating on them and either other forms of sexual assault or attempted sexual assault.
During the press conference, Watson denied assaulting, harassing or disrespecting any woman. But the Thome family, as well as some other fans, don’t seem to be buying it. Andrea added that if the Browns don’t refund the tickets, she would auction off every one of their tickets and publicly donate the money to different women’s crisis charities.
Her husband, Jim, is a Hall of Famer who spent 12 seasons in Cleveland, where he was named an All-Star three times. FF
A guy is maintaining his innocence, and you want him to stop doing that? You want him to stop denying the things he didn’t do? Show remorse for something he isn’t guilty of?
My take away. He could have had sex with these women without doing some illegal, but at the same time he could also have acted without respect by using his fame and male power to do something they felt uncomfortable with. It's possible to have these two parallel thoughts in our heads and come to the conclusion that he's legally innocent but at the same time acting creepy and morally incorrect in these situations. There is no conflict in these two conclusions.
One thing I frequently come back to is the one part of the text that was shared by his 'handler'. She said something to the effect of 'these guys don't get told no very often'. I very much agree with the part of your statement I quoted above. As a fan trying to figure out how to root for a team with a guy with a past like Watson's front-and-center, I worry that his situation will linger in this weird grey area forever. Neither side in the debate will be proven right or wrong.
My feeling is that something took place, but at what extent? Two grand juries came to the same conclusion, and that is all I have to go on.
And getting a indictment from a grand jury is high, like 98.5% high or higher. If the grand jury sends back a no bill, the evidence is as flimsy as it gets, or non-existent. On a 12 person panel, all states are different, but 1/3 voting true can send something to trial.
In many of the no bill cases, the DA may not have even pursued the issue except for the optics of the matter.
Don't know if it's true, but the saying is, you can get a ham sandwich indicted LOL
I posted a link. Nationally only 5% of all sexual assault cases reported to the police end up being prosecuted. 0.7% are convicted.
Anyone using the GJ decision to sway their opinion might be assuming that ham sandwich can be indicted, but with regards to this area of criminal prosecution that is not rhe case. It's why, based on studies, 31% of assaults don't even get reported. I guess people could accuse women of lying about being sexuay assaulted and not reporting it to the police? But I don't see a motive or angle for doing that.
I'm not saying Watson is pure.....nobody but he and GOD knows the truth. You've judged him. A lot has been made about the 40 massage therapists. If you've been in Houston for 5yrs...quick math - he changed workers every 45 days. I wonder how many solicitations a single multimillionaire puts up with a week. Just saying, he's innocent until proven guilty......and we know lawyers are only after looking out for the best people....please Sidney "release the Kraken"....GO Browns!!!!
And her lies the problem. "Nobody but he and God knows the truth" the problem being is we totally forget about the victims (alleged ) but they know the truth also. This is a mans world and all to often the female victim is forgotten or not listened to. Already in your mind and many others they just don't exist. I think I read somewhere only 10% of the cases go past the grand jury because of this fact that they are ignored. Are these young women just plain scuzzy in that industry or are they legit in their profession. If scuzzy why is a millionaire contacting them?
I know you all wish to accept this cause he is a very good QB. I don't think there is anyways around it not when you got 20+ And Watson continue to outright DENY this ever happened and that his mother raised him right and he is squeaky clean.
I love my Browns and will never root for another team. I think in the long run we end up getting screwed over this. Don't wish that to happen but I have come to expect that to happen - we will see. Right now I would like to get a 2nd rounder for Baker at the least, teams know he is worth all that its that one year contract at 19 mil that is hard to take.
I posted a link. Nationally only 5% of all sexual assault cases reported to the police end up being prosecuted. 0.7% are convicted.
Anyone using the GJ decision to sway their opinion might be assuming that ham sandwich can be indicted, but with regards to this area of criminal prosecution that is not rhe case. It's why, based on studies, 31% of assaults don't even get reported. I guess people could accuse women of lying about being sexuay assaulted and not reporting it to the police? But I don't see a motive or angle for doing that.
I am not saying it is right, wrong, your numbers are wrong, my numbers are proof or anything like that.
The fact is it is very hard to prove beyond the accusation, so it is what it is. We can't just start taking peoples word or you start making people prove innocence, and how do you do that? You can't, especially in a case like this.
That is why these cases are few to go to trial and fewer result in conviction. Without proof, what do you have?
[/i]Swish]A guy is maintaining his innocence, and you want him to stop doing that? You want him to stop denying the things he didn’t do? Show remorse for something he isn’t guilty of?
Yea, I wouldn’t do that either if I was innocent.
Here is a lesson that comes with age and experience. I’m not suggesting that you don’t have it but just so we be clear sometimes in life you can chose to be smart or you can chose to trying to be 100% right.
First of all we don’t know if he’s innocent. (“things he didn’t do” or not) Not even a grand jury can establish that with 100% certainty without proof. So that argument goes out of the window.
Secondly maybe he in his own eyes sees himself innocent but these 22 women and maybe some others don’t think it’s so clear and obvious. It’s all about what we think is involved in the word ‘innocent”. There are many times in my life when I have felt that I’m innocent but instead of fighting for my “honor” I sometimes take the smart road and apologize so we can move on.
Third when 22 women accuse you of wrong doings you’re probably not without fault. Maybe Watson think it’s normal with massage and “happy endings” and maybe he thinks that he’s paying for these “services” but that doesn’t mean the women agree with his conclusions. So from the first moment he could have misunderstood their mutual agreements.
The reason I and many others suggest he should settle the cases is because that’s the smartest way to move forward. Instead of fighting in a court house for months maybe years he can end this media circus and start to focus on his future as being a Brown QB. It’s can also be important, believe it or not, to make peace with these women. Leaving so many unsatisfied women behind you without solving these issues can in a worst case scenario create a situation when these women or people in general searching for some sorts of revenge. Never underestimate peoples willingness to get the score even.
Finally DeShaun Watson, or maybe I should jokingly start to call him Mr Happy Ending, has all the money in the world to solve his future so he can move on in peace. Invest a couple of millions and let this s h i t go away FFS.
Be smart. Create the ultimate Happy Ending… LOL Life isn’t always fair and sometimes we have to accept that. That goes for both Mr Happy Ending and these 22 women.
If I’m innocent, then I’m gonna maintain my innocence. Anything less IS an admission of guilt.
I dunno if Watson is 100% innocent, but HE believes he is. You’re mad at the guy for defending his character, something that every last person on this board would do in a similar situation.
Again, putting myself in his shoes, I’m not making peace with anybody trying to ruin my career. I got two different grand juries that wouldn’t even bother bring charges up, and I’m absolutely fighting the lawsuits, cause I’m not paying a damn thing for something I didn’t do. I might even counter sue because two of them tried to extort me for cash.
Yes deshaun, be smart. Fight the nonsense, and the rulings on the lawsuits will determine if you’re liable or not. Don’t do what fans say, because they’re the same fans who didn’t want you traded here in the first place.
A guy is maintaining his innocence, and you want him to stop doing that? You want him to stop denying the things he didn’t do? Show remorse for something he isn’t guilty of?
Yea, I wouldn’t do that either if I was innocent.
You wouldn't do it if you had 22 lawsuits pending either. Almost every person in prison claims they're innocent too. Just ask them.
I'll ask a very basic question to anyone who wants to answer.
Do you believe that proof is needed to convict someone of a crime? Yes or no is the only answer needed. Yes or no?
I think that 22 accusations from 22 different women is evidence.
It is circumstantial at best and inadmissible for criminal complaints.
So circumstantial evidence isn't evidence? The totality of the accusers isn't evidence? Do you have any idea how many people have been convicted strictly based on circumstantial evidence?
Here's the bottom line. It's the word of watson against the word of each women. So you certainly have to draw a conclusion either way. You either have to do the mental gymnastics to convince yourself that 22 women are lying or you have to consider the overwhelming number of women. One would have to consider the numbers in regards to the conviction rates that mgh posted above. This really isn't all that complicated. Some have chosen to believe what they want to believe in order to justify supporting him.
I'll ask a very basic question to anyone who wants to answer.
Do you believe that proof is needed to convict someone of a crime? Yes or no is the only answer needed. Yes or no?
I think that 22 accusations from 22 different women is evidence.
It is circumstantial at best and inadmissible for criminal complaints.
So circumstantial evidence isn't evidence? The totality of the accusers isn't evidence? Do you have any idea how many people have been convicted strictly based on circumstantial evidence?
Here's the bottom line. It's the word of watson against the word of each women. So you certainly have to draw a conclusion either way. You either have to do the mental gymnastics to convince yourself that 22 women are lying or you have to consider the overwhelming number of women. One would have to consider the numbers in regards to the conviction rates that mgh posted above. This really isn't all that complicated. Some have chosen to believe what they want to believe in order to justify supporting him.
There are no mental gymnastics needed for anything. Our legal system presumes you innocent until you are proven guilty. It also requires that the evidence presented be direct eveidnce, not something that is merely a circumstance. The number of accusers is merely a circumstance of the situation. Thus far the witnesses have not had compelling testimony to grant an indictment. Those are the facts.
I get it, you want blood. You have a visceral need to see him punished for something because you, like a lot of people, can't fathom someone is accused without cause. Thankfully our legal system isn't twitter. Thankfully we have minimum standards for evidence before someone loses their freedoms. Thankfully YOU are not in charge of judging these complaints except on the Internet.
Beat the drum until it breaks but that does not change the fact that the number of accurers will be circumstantial evidence and would not be permissible in a criminal complaint. It may end up having bearing in a civil matter, but a civil matter would not be aout guilt. It is about responsibility.
Maybe if you stopped your mental gymnastics and looked at this with some logic and understanding of how the legal system is designed you would understand it better. You don't have to like it, but that is how it is.
I'll ask a very basic question to anyone who wants to answer.
Do you believe that proof is needed to convict someone of a crime? Yes or no is the only answer needed. Yes or no?
I think that 22 accusations from 22 different women is evidence.
It's evidence. The question is evidence of what? To answer that question, one has to look at how that evidence fits together with all the other evidence. Without access to all the other evidence/on their own, accusations are nowhere near conclusive.
22 accusations could be evidence of 22 crimes. 22 accusations could be evidence of a conspiracy. There are a lot of things each accusation could be evidence of.
That's your story and you're sticking to it. With all of those mental gymnastics I'm sure your mind is in terrific shape.
Pot meet kettle. Although one might wonder if instead of terrific shape the inability to adapt to additional information is indicative of one having the neuroplasticity of a box of rocks.
This is the state of our society today. A lot of things "could be". But to try to lump them all together like the probability of all those scenarios being as equally likely is where the flaw lies. There are some scenarios that seem pretty logical. Some are very far fethched.
If I’m innocent, then I’m gonna maintain my innocence. Anything less IS an admission of guilt.
I dunno if Watson is 100% innocent, but HE believes he is. You’re mad at the guy for defending his character, something that every last person on this board would do in a similar situation.
Again, putting myself in his shoes, I’m not making peace with anybody trying to ruin my career. I got two different grand juries that wouldn’t even bother bring charges up, and I’m absolutely fighting the lawsuits, cause I’m not paying a damn thing for something I didn’t do. I might even counter sue because two of them tried to extort me for cash.
Yes deshaun, be smart. Fight the nonsense, and the rulings on the lawsuits will determine if you’re liable or not. Don’t do what fans say, because they’re the same fans who didn’t want you traded here in the first place.
Anything less IS an admission of guilt. Just because YOU don’t think you’re guilty or the court rule in your favor doesn’t mean all others see you as innocent. Settling these cases doesn’t automatically mean 100% guilt or innocence for either Watson or these 22 women. It means both want to move on without admitting either guilt or innocence. There are still two perspectives and two versions of what happened between these 22 women and Mr Happy. (Sorry I couldn’t help myself)
You’re mad at the guy for defending his character, something that every last person on this board would do in a similar situation.
Actually the opposite. When I see a young man potentially getting into deeper trouble I and many others (many experienced lawyers) advice Mr Happy to maybe forget about about guilt or not guilt. Nobody will walk out of this with their honor intact. Life isn’t that black and white when it comes to sexual activities and paying for “services”.
I’m not making peace with anybody trying to ruin my career.
Once again you just look at it from your perspective. Nobody is ruin anybody’s career. What kind of crap is that. You can easily flip the coin and say that Mr Happy is ruin his own career when paying women for “services” that in some cases end up with sexual activities. My take is that Mr Watson probably can put his career more on track if he settle this cases and just move on.
What is nonsense for you maybe other people with other perspectives sees as being smart and thinking long term. We come back to the same thing as Mr Happy wanted in the first place.
A truly Happy Ending. (Now I have to stop,,,,)
(Swish - Sorry for all the lame jokes. Not aimed at you)
That's your story and you're sticking to it. With all of those mental gymnastics I'm sure your mind is in terrific shape.
Pot meet kettle. Although one might wonder if instead of terrific shape the inability to adapt to additional information is indicative of one having the neuroplasticity of a box of rocks.
Sadly you try to compare some made up conspiracy theory as being on equal footing as 22 accusations and then question the neuroplasticity of someone else? That's rich.
And what "additional information" are you talking about? That out of all the over 50 massage therapists he's had, 18 of them who spoke out that they weren't sexually assaulted? Or is it that somehow watson's defense attorney magically came up with what, four or five women that claim a hand full of the alleged victims were lying? Or is it a recording that none of us know the content of?
See, it seems that those who accuse me of cherry picking what they do and don't believe are trying to make some case by doing the exact same thing. So as you would say, pot meet kettle.
Not knowing the content makes me consider the possibilities. Not knowing the content apparently makes you pretend things don't exist. Those are quite a bit different.
I've never said they were equally probable. However, the improbable frequently happens. The likelihood of winning the lottery is low, and yet, people win it. People get struck by lightning. Clusters of unexpected data points show up in statistical studies.
The probability of a rich, famous man being falsely accused is different from the average man. The probability of a rich, famous man that meets a multitude of women online is probably even higher. But still, the probability isn't important. What actually occurred is the thing that is legally relevant.
Do you suffer from chronic insomnia? Reduced neuroplasticity would explain a lot.
I posted a link. Nationally only 5% of all sexual assault cases reported to the police end up being prosecuted. 0.7% are convicted.
Anyone using the GJ decision to sway their opinion might be assuming that ham sandwich can be indicted, but with regards to this area of criminal prosecution that is not rhe case. It's why, based on studies, 31% of assaults don't even get reported. I guess people could accuse women of lying about being sexuay assaulted and not reporting it to the police? But I don't see a motive or angle for doing that.
I am not saying it is right, wrong, your numbers are wrong, my numbers are proof or anything like that.
The fact is it is very hard to prove beyond the accusation, so it is what it is. We can't just start taking peoples word or you start making people prove innocence, and how do you do that? You can't, especially in a case like this.
That is why these cases are few to go to trial and fewer result in conviction. Without proof, what do you have?
While I don't disagree with your point - I also want to reiterate what my point is .... there are a large number of posters thinking that not being indicted by the GJ on these allegations is tantamount and equal to being viewed innocent of all charges. The numbers surrounding the conviction and prosecution rates shines a very, very bright light on the fact that what might apply to other criminal prosecution (you can indict a ham sandwich) does most definitely NOT apply to cases of sexual assault. Clearly if on 5% of reported incidence are prosecuted .... either 95% of the time the victim is lying - or the issue of proving guilt is a significant obstacle.
My point - seemingly backed by logic and historical data - is that the GJ decision means very little regards whether Watson may or may not be innocent. It is not a judgement of guilt it is a judgement about provability in the eyes of the law.
And that leads to your point of needing proof - yes, in a court of law, and in the eyes of the law that is entirely how it works. But the law and legal system and courts are not infallible nor are they perfect. . . But to repeat - if fans or people in general want to suspend any suspicion and feel Watson is innocent until proven otherwise, I don't have a problem with that. I am not going to tell them they are wrong or judge them. My very best friend in the world holds that view. For myself - as Rich Eisen quite eloquently expressed on more than one segment of his show - I have serious reservations about the conduct and the accusations, whether or not they are provable in a court of law. I see text messages from a women responsible for arranging massages expressing and exposing an issue - I see her later pleading the 5th which is her right, but raises more questions as it does whenever the accused pleads the 5th regardless of how the law is supposed to view it. And I see people judging Watson differently than they would a school teacher or CEO or office manager who had 22 civil claims of this nature hanging over them. He's not guilty in my eyes - because nothing has been proven - but he is under a cloud, and he and the Browns are tainted until the civil cases are dealt with and any evidence from those cases is reviewed/known.
Maybe you should explain what you consider the word "frequently" to mean. Your demeaning response seems out of character for you but at this juncture I don't find it surprising.
But I like the jokes. At the end of the day, that isn’t me who has to answer for it, and I’ve already cracked a few myself throughout this so we’re good!
I'll ask a very basic question to anyone who wants to answer.
Do you believe that proof is needed to convict someone of a crime? Yes or no is the only answer needed. Yes or no?
Convict? Yes.
But we don't convict people, that is left up to the courts. And there are a plethora of examples of public sentiment without a court case. Take Rock v Smith last night as an example...
Maybe you should explain what you consider the word "frequently" to mean. Your demeaning response seems out of character for you but at this juncture I don't find it surprising.
For example, the odds of winning a powerball jackpot are 1 in millions (I think I saw 292M-ish somewhere.) However a dozen or so people win those jackpots every year.
While the odds of something happening to any particular person can be low, The odds of that thing happening to some person, somewhere can be high.
Watson could just be that "1 in a million" person that got "(un)lucky."
You seem to put an irrational amount of belief in numbers. You constantly refer to the 22 women as if they're part of some simple arithmetic problem. 22 > 1, so Deshaun is lying. I see it as more of a complex polynomial algebraic problem with a plethora of unknown variables. So many unknown variables, in fact, that I have little hope in solving it, so instead I admit multiple possibilities. 22 accusers is a part of the equation, not the equation in its entirety. Or perhaps rather each accuser is her own part of the equation, but even those parts have their own unknown variables.
All the other percentages concerning sexual assault cases and reporting are context, but they're not a part of this particular equation.
It wasn't meant to be demeaning. It was me musing on possibilities. I read an article on neuroplasticity. It got me pondering whether stubbornness was a choice or whether the inability of the brain to form new connections presents as stubbornness. According to the article, chronic insomnia can lead to decreased neuroplasticity. Age can also lead to a decrease in the brains ability to adapt.
Many people seem to be sticking to their initial stances on this subject. I was wondering out loud if neuroplasticity, or lack thereof, played a role.
I was raised by an engineer, not a sociologist, I suppose that's a factor in the way I approach problems. I tend to try deconstruct things and see how the pieces might fit. I like hard facts and verifiability. I don't like making assumptions based on human polling.
JMHO, the world has been screwed up forever. Lots of forks DON'T believe in....innocent until PROVEN guilty....they've judged. I find it VERY interesting that the Haslam family talked it over and NONE of the three females vetoed the trade. I'm sure they didn't have any more info than the posters on this blog.
DW has been NOTHING but spectacular on and OFF the field- AND he denies and has not PAID a single woman yet. He's stated he's done nothing wrong- could he POSSIBLY be telling the truth. He comes from a single female parent of humble background- he probably was taught to disrespect women-----NOT. Go Browns!!!
[/i]Swish]A guy is maintaining his innocence, and you want him to stop doing that? You want him to stop denying the things he didn’t do? Show remorse for something he isn’t guilty of?
Yea, I wouldn’t do that either if I was innocent.
Here is a lesson that comes with age and experience. I’m not suggesting that you don’t have it but just so we be clear sometimes in life you can chose to be smart or you can chose to trying to be 100% right.
First of all we don’t know if he’s innocent. (“things he didn’t do” or not) Not even a grand jury can establish that with 100% certainty without proof. So that argument goes out of the window.
Secondly maybe he in his own eyes sees himself innocent but these 22 women and maybe some others don’t think it’s so clear and obvious. It’s all about what we think is involved in the word ‘innocent”. There are many times in my life when I have felt that I’m innocent but instead of fighting for my “honor” I sometimes take the smart road and apologize so we can move on.
Third when 22 women accuse you of wrong doings you’re probably not without fault. Maybe Watson think it’s normal with massage and “happy endings” and maybe he thinks that he’s paying for these “services” but that doesn’t mean the women agree with his conclusions. So from the first moment he could have misunderstood their mutual agreements.
The reason I and many others suggest he should settle the cases is because that’s the smartest way to move forward. Instead of fighting in a court house for months maybe years he can end this media circus and start to focus on his future as being a Brown QB. It’s can also be important, believe it or not, to make peace with these women. Leaving so many unsatisfied women behind you without solving these issues can in a worst case scenario create a situation when these women or people in general searching for some sorts of revenge. Never underestimate peoples willingness to get the score even.
Finally DeShaun Watson, or maybe I should jokingly start to call him Mr Happy Ending, has all the money in the world to solve his future so he can move on in peace. Invest a couple of millions and let this s h i t go away FFS.
Be smart. Create the ultimate Happy Ending… LOL Life isn’t always fair and sometimes we have to accept that. That goes for both Mr Happy Ending and these 22 women.
This isn't wisdom, it's compliance with unfair norms. He shouldn't humble himself or settle if he is 100% innocent. To be honest at this point, sticking to his guns and proving his innocence is the best way out. If he can do that there will be no black marks (question marks) left on anything he accomplishes. If he settles, his entire career will be tainted by that. And fans will despise him.
I'll ask a very basic question to anyone who wants to answer.
Do you believe that proof is needed to convict someone of a crime? Yes or no is the only answer needed. Yes or no?
I think that 22 accusations from 22 different women is evidence.
But evidence of what? This is my sticking point since just before this DW claimed his ownership was racist. He pissed off BIG MONEY there. Who knows what triggered all these women to come forward all at once? But I could see this easily being an attack coordinated by somebody with deep pockets. That combined with 2 juries declining to charge, almost as many women saying he did nothing inappropriate, and his consistent claim of innocence (refusing to settle), all start to paint a different picture. I'm not sure on him, but I'm now much more open to facts.
I have just watched the Browns exclusive interview with Deshaun and Nathan Zegura. It’s almost heartbreaking to hear him talk about football and his future and to see him feel secure and relaxed made me root for him a little bit.
Strangely enough I liked what he said and it was touching to see him be in his natural element. As father of grown up kids I perfectly understand his relief and happiness to be “free’ again. It’s also why I’m so irritated and conflicted about this whole situation. If I’m angry and disappointed it’s with Andrew Berry and his side kick Stifinsky. (I just renamed him) It’s easy to understand a young man coming thru a storm of allegations and negative media coverage. Whatever happened he’s only human. But our GM and HC is a different story.
Someone will have to pay the price for me and many other disappointed Browns supporters frustration. Right now Berry and the side kick will be my go to guys. First Baker then this vomiting hypocrisy
So in his interview with Zegura - he says Cleveland was never out of the running. He made his decision based on our chance to win a SB... and no mention of the $250 million. Guy clearly never lies.
So in his interview with Zegura - he says Cleveland was never out of the running. He made his decision based on our chance to win a SB... and no mention of the $250 million. Guy clearly never lies.
Or his waiving his no trade clause was contingent on roughly that contract and all the teams considered indicated that they were willing to do it. If they were all willing, the money isn't really a differentiator.
It's another one of those things that we'll probably never know the whole truth of.
I'll ask a very basic question to anyone who wants to answer.
Do you believe that proof is needed to convict someone of a crime? Yes or no is the only answer needed. Yes or no?
Convict? Yes.
But we don't convict people, that is left up to the courts. And there are a plethora of examples of public sentiment without a court case. Take Rock v Smith last night as an example...
I don't understand your point?
I see many evade my question. What I see to this point is 2 GJ's examined the claims and the associated evidence presented by the DA and didn't find it worth of even going to trial.
What is it those people on the panel don't know that some of the people on this board "know"?
I think the point is that some folks desperately want Watson to be guilty. They don't care about innocent until proven guilty. They don't care about a fair trial and allowing the law to take its course. They care about convicting a person through the avenue of public opinion. They would have fit right in Colonial New England when witches were unfairly tried and burned at the stake. The facts of the case didn't matter. Public outrage and condemnation are what is important here.
Personally, I have not idea what the real truth is. If Watson is guilty, he should pay the price for his crimes. If he is innocent, he should be permitted to live his life freely. I do find it hard to overlook 22 civil cases. I also find it hard to overlook that the number grew after Watson accused the Texans of internal racism and insisted on not playing for them again and then the news came out. Why didn't any of the alleged victims say anything before the civil suit was filed? It could be they were intimidated by the public scrutiny of making such accusations. Lord knows, countless women have subjected to cruel treatment for reporting sex crimes. On the other hand, it's possible they are chasing the almighty dollar. I don't know and neither does anyone else on here. Those pretending they are the omnipotent seers and prophets of this case and others are a stone around the neck of an evolving society.
JC The one thing I haven't seen mentioned is the burden of proof in civil cases is much lower than that of a grand jury or criminal case. He could very easily be "innocent" and still lose the civil cases.
I'll ask a very basic question to anyone who wants to answer.
Do you believe that proof is needed to convict someone of a crime? Yes or no is the only answer needed. Yes or no?
Yes.... But there is a plethora of cases where people have been convicted on circumstantial evidence.. For what it's worth, there are 22 woman who say he's guilty. Only one person saying he's innocent.
All I'm saying is this, he went to women that he didn't even know were certified massage therapists. (There is an article out there with his deposition in it)
By his own admission he drove out of his way to get to those women.
All I'm saying is this, he went to women that he didn't even know were certified massage therapists. (There is an article out there with his deposition in it)
What you're describing is just as close to prostitution as it is to sex assault.
When it comes to online dating or anything online on social media or online advertisements, how much does one really "know" about the other person/business? First "dates"/visits are always a bit of a leap of faith.
I've met plenty of people without licenses that can give a good massage. I've met people with licenses that gave lousy massages.
The only way to really "know" which is which is to actually get a massage.
People bring up the number of "massage therapists" as evidence that he was doing something wrong. Would it change your thinking if you thought of them as job interviews? If you were considering bringing in a full time massage specialist, would you hire the first candidate?
I don't know whether or not the women are lying any more or less than you or anyone else that has never met them, nor seen/heard all of the evidence. They could be lying. They could not. That's why we have a legal system.
People bring up the number of "massage therapists" as evidence that he was doing something wrong. Would it change your thinking if you thought of them as job interviews? If you were considering bringing in a full time massage specialist, would you hire the first candidate?
Would you hire the 50th? Or keep trying them all out??
All I'm saying is this, he went to women that he didn't even know were certified massage therapists. (There is an article out there with his deposition in it)
What you're describing is just as close to prostitution as it is to sex assault.
So not only are some saying the women lied, but now they are potentially hookers?
Is it possible they are hookers? Yup it sure is possible. But they are out there, names on a complaint. So if they were hookers, committing illegal acts, do you think they'd come forward?
Better yet, if a woman is a hooker and gets forced to do things she doesn't want to do, are you saying "she asked for it"? Should the charges be ignored for that reason?
Has there been any discussion of these ‘massage therapists’ former clients? Is Watson the only former client that’s been discovered? I have to wonder if any of these women have other, no name, clients that have had ‘release’ during their sessions? I’d think the investigators would have tracked down some other former clients… right?
I’ve not read every document or listened to/read all the press. Can anyone answer?
As far as I know some of the 22 are not licensed and the assumption is they might well be likely to offer rub n tug services. Some are licensed and are not in any way associated with anything but professional massage services. The inclusion of some non licensed individuals seems to be an excuse to tarnish them and also theicenses therapists.
Bottom line is we don't know. If it goes to civil trial we will maybe find out more.
Bottom line: whether or not any are/were prostitutes has no real bearing. An unwelcomed or forced interaction is still what it is; sexual assault and borderline rape.
Originally Posted by PortlandDawg
Has there been any discussion of these ‘massage therapists’ former clients?
No. Nobody from the team seems to have spoken with anyone other than Watson's lawyers. They intentionally did not contact any of the women, and the women likely would not have shared info on past clientelle.
Even if they were tracked down, who would admit such a thing on the record?
The massage therapists social media/"business" accounts would be a place to look for evidence and establish patterns, but it appears some of them have scrubbed their accounts. link
JC The one thing I haven't seen mentioned is the burden of proof in civil cases is much lower than that of a grand jury or criminal case. He could very easily be "innocent" and still lose the civil cases.
Not so much the grand jury. A grand jury doesn't have to be unanimous. A civil case still needs that, but doesn't need to be beyond reasonable doubt. It just needs to be some level of doubt.
Swish]A guy is maintaining his innocence, and you want him to stop doing that? You want him to stop denying the things he didn’t do? Show remorse for something he isn’t guilty of?
Yea, I wouldn’t do that either if I was innocent.
Here is a lesson that comes with age and experience. I’m not suggesting that you don’t have it but just so we be clear sometimes in life you can chose to be smart or you can chose to trying to be 100% right.
First of all we don’t know if he’s innocent. (“things he didn’t do” or not) Not even a grand jury can establish that with 100% certainty without proof. So that argument goes out of the window.
Secondly maybe he in his own eyes sees himself innocent but these 22 women and maybe some others don’t think it’s so clear and obvious. It’s all about what we think is involved in the word ‘innocent”. There are many times in my life when I have felt that I’m innocent but instead of fighting for my “honor” I sometimes take the smart road and apologize so we can move on.
Third when 22 women accuse you of wrong doings you’re probably not without fault. Maybe Watson think it’s normal with massage and “happy endings” and maybe he thinks that he’s paying for these “services” but that doesn’t mean the women agree with his conclusions. So from the first moment he could have misunderstood their mutual agreements.
The reason I and many others suggest he should settle the cases is because that’s the smartest way to move forward. Instead of fighting in a court house for months maybe years he can end this media circus and start to focus on his future as being a Brown QB. It’s can also be important, believe it or not, to make peace with these women. Leaving so many unsatisfied women behind you without solving these issues can in a worst case scenario create a situation when these women or people in general searching for some sorts of revenge. Never underestimate peoples willingness to get the score even.
Finally DeShaun Watson, or maybe I should jokingly start to call him Mr Happy Ending, has all the money in the world to solve his future so he can move on in peace. Invest a couple of millions and let this s h i t go away FFS.
Be smart. Create the ultimate Happy Ending… LOL Life isn’t always fair and sometimes we have to accept that. That goes for both Mr Happy Ending and these 22 women.
This isn't wisdom, it's compliance with unfair norms. He shouldn't humble himself or settle if he is 100% innocent. To be honest at this point, sticking to his guns and proving his innocence is the best way out. If he can do that there will be no black marks (question marks) left on anything he accomplishes. If he settles, his entire career will be tainted by that. And fans will despise him.
The key sentence in your answer is “if he is 100% innocent”
This is where you and I have different views. I and many with me doesn’t see him as totally guilty or 100% innocent. From a legal standpoint regarding the risk of being sent to jail he’s so far innocent but these 22 civil law suits is still left and can in a worst case scenario cost him a fortune both economically and with the chance that more unsatisfactory information about his behavior will see the day light. Or maybe if he wins all 22 cases they will not cost him anything at all except cost for lawyers and so on. The probability of him losing some of the cases is probably rather high if you listen to experienced lawyers. His own lawyer is in a win and win situation so I shouldn’t count him as an fair adviser and expert.
His career is already tainted by these law suits and nothing will change that these allegations will follow him and the Browns as long as he’s a NFL player. Unfairly? Probably. But that’s how the (social)media works in these days. People will think that where is smoke it’s probably some fire.
So what can he gain from fighting his innocence?
In a best case scenario he can probably maintain his initial stance without having to over and over explain himself and he will probably win a few people over to his side. Maybe the media will be more kind to him. It can boost his self confidence but apart from that his personal situation will probably be the same as it is today. Some will believe him others will not.
The other road to walk is to end all media drama and settle these cases.
22 women can move on and both parties can put this sad story behind them. That’s worth a lot. He can still maintain his innocence but admit that things could have been handled better. That will satisfy a majority of the public opinion and probably most of the media. He will have a few days of media storm but after that it’s probably out of interest for the vast majority of people. But the most important thing is that he don’t have to show up in court. Ask any lawyer and they will tell you that’s a lottery where the total truth often isn’t always part of the negotiations.
So once again. Take the good with the bad. Buy yourself a costly insurance but move on. He can easily afford it and it will not economically affect his future life. See it as a lesson in life and avoid to do the same s h i t again. 22 legal law suits should tell you that something went totally wrong, if not you’re probably stupid or misled by the wrong people.
Has there been any discussion of these ‘massage therapists’ former clients? Is Watson the only former client that’s been discovered? I have to wonder if any of these women have other, no name, clients that have had ‘release’ during their sessions? I’d think the investigators would have tracked down some other former clients… right?
I’ve not read every document or listened to/read all the press. Can anyone answer?
Just thinking out loud here, but might that be the reason no indictments came down? Maybe upon investigation, it was found that some/all of these women were in fact providing a happy ending to many clients..
If that's the case, is that the same as saying they asked for it?
Bottom line: whether or not any are/were prostitutes has no real bearing. An unwelcomed or forced interaction is still what it is; sexual assault and borderline rape.
Originally Posted by PortlandDawg
Has there been any discussion of these ‘massage therapists’ former clients?
No. Nobody from the team seems to have spoken with anyone other than Watson's lawyers. They intentionally did not contact any of the women, and the women likely would not have shared info on past clientelle.
My questions were not in an attempt to victim blame. Let me make that clear. It was more out of curiosity for more of the overall picture.
Bottom line: whether or not any are/were prostitutes has no real bearing. An unwelcomed or forced interaction is still what it is; sexual assault and borderline rape.
Originally Posted by PortlandDawg
Has there been any discussion of these ‘massage therapists’ former clients?
No. Nobody from the team seems to have spoken with anyone other than Watson's lawyers. They intentionally did not contact any of the women, and the women likely would not have shared info on past clientelle.
My questions were not in an attempt to victim blame. Let me make that clear. It was more out of curiosity for more of the overall picture.
Sorry Port, if I came across sounding as if you were victim blaming I'm sorry,, Didn't mean to say that.... But you brought up a good question
Seriously, it'd be about finding the right fit. I definitely wouldn't hire one that I thought might try to falsely accuse me of sexual assault.
Rich athlete good. Accusers are gold diggers and liars. And then you wonder why women are afraid to come out and tell the truth about the rich and powerful. This isn't the first time you've undermined the women this way.
Even if they were tracked down, who would admit such a thing on the record?
The massage therapists social media/"business" accounts would be a place to look for evidence and establish patterns, but it appears some of them have scrubbed their accounts. link
Yeah, that would have to be nefarious, right? It's not that they're receiving threats and nasty calls from people like you can see undermining their credibility making them out tpo all be liars and hookers.
[color:#99FF99]The key sentence in your answer is “if he is 100% innocent”
This is where you and I have different views. I and many with me doesn’t see him as totally guilty or 100% innocent. From a legal standpoint regarding the risk of being sent to jail he’s so far innocent but these 22 civil law suits is still left and can in a worst case scenario cost him a fortune both economically and with the chance that more unsatisfactory information about his behavior will see the day light. Or maybe if he wins all 22 cases they will not cost him anything at all except cost for lawyers and so on. The probability of him losing some of the cases is probably rather high if you listen to experienced lawyers. His own lawyer is in a win and win situation so I shouldn’t count him as an fair adviser and expert.
His career is already tainted by these law suits and nothing will change that these allegations will follow him and the Browns as long as he’s a NFL player. Unfairly? Probably. But that’s how the (social)media works in these days. People will think that where is smoke it’s probably some fire.
So what can he gain from fighting his innocence?
In a best case scenario he can probably maintain his initial stance without having to over and over explain himself and he will probably win a few people over to his side. Maybe the media will be more kind to him. It can boost his self confidence but apart from that his personal situation will probably be the same as it is today. Some will believe him others will not.
The other road to walk is to end all media drama and settle these cases.
22 women can move on and both parties can put this sad story behind them. That’s worth a lot. He can still maintain his innocence but admit that things could have been handled better. That will satisfy a majority of the public opinion and probably most of the media. He will have a few days of media storm but after that it’s probably out of interest for the vast majority of people. But the most important thing is that he don’t have to show up in court. Ask any lawyer and they will tell you that’s a lottery where the total truth often isn’t always part of the negotiations.
So once again. Take the good with the bad. Buy yourself a costly insurance but move on. He can easily afford it and it will not economically affect his future life. See it as a lesson in life and avoid to do the same s h i t again. 22 legal law suits should tell you that something went totally wrong, if not you’re probably stupid or misled by the wrong people.
The thing you might be overlooking is that it takes more than Watson to settle. Each of the women would have to agree to it also. They might have astronomical demands or are just willing to gamble on a chance that a jury will give them an astronomical verdict. If the proliferation of the gambling industry in our economy is any indication, Americans are willing to gamble.
If you were innocent and the women demanded 100 million dollars combined or more, would you give that much to them?
Even if they were tracked down, who would admit such a thing on the record?
The massage therapists social media/"business" accounts would be a place to look for evidence and establish patterns, but it appears some of them have scrubbed their accounts. link
Yeah, that would have to be nefarious, right? It's not that they're receiving threats and nasty calls from people like you can see undermining their credibility making them out tpo all be liars and hookers.
I do find it interesting that the contrarian on this issue would more willingly imply removing a web site is an indication of someone being guilty of something.. In comparison to someone being accused by 22 people of wrongdoing. Now... I'm sure that's probably not the case and it's simply that the contrarian is leaving all options open as possibilities... But there's much more ink offering speculation on how or why the 22 are lying than the other way around.
On phone, so apologies if that doesn't read clearly.* tried to clear it up a bit.
Seriously, it'd be about finding the right fit. I definitely wouldn't hire one that I thought might try to falsely accuse me of sexual assault.
Rich athlete good. Accusers are gold diggers and liars. And then you wonder why women are afraid to come out and tell the truth about the rich and powerful. This isn't the first time you've undermined the women this way.
You're reading more into it than was written.
I was responding to a hypothetical question with what I would hypothetically do.
I've constantly said that I don't know who is lying. If wanting the facts before judging is undermining, then I'm Urist McUnderminer.
I haven't jumped to the same conclusion as you. I've tried to keep an open mind. I've tried to empathize with DeShaun a bit more because frankly it's easier to put myself in a dude's shoes. I have a hard enough time trying to understand the women I'm around everyday, let alone a bunch of women I've never so much as seen, let alone actually met. It's not a matter of respect. It's a case of there's a ton that I know I don't know about them.
While I've gone to get messages, I've never been a masseuse, and neither have I ever been a woman. This is an instance where the you've never been (insert minority/category) statement applies.
You seem to be the one making assumptions. "Rich athlete bad, Accusers are honest," seems to be your story. Are you "undermining" DeShaun/the Browns?
You say you don't know but seem to repeatedly imply they are liars, some type of hookers, are only in it for a money grab and an assortment of things that shed a negative light on these women. It's only obvious that if someone who claims they don't know actually means that, there would be a balance to their opinions that head in both directions. That hasn't been the case from you thus far.
All I've seen is how the fact there are 22 accusers doesn't mean anything. Make an inference that canceling their accounts is somehow a nefarious act. Insinuating they are hookers.
You see, making a disclaimer is only as good as what comes after that disclaimer. And making such a disclaimer doesn't even come close to the content of your posts on the topic.
And yes, with 22 accusers I do think he's guilty of at least some of the things he's being accused of. I'm not naive enough to try and convince myself that 22 women are just all making everything they're saying up. But then I've never tried to disguise or hide that by putting out some false disclaimer to say otherwise.
Even if they were tracked down, who would admit such a thing on the record?
The massage therapists social media/"business" accounts would be a place to look for evidence and establish patterns, but it appears some of them have scrubbed their accounts. link
Yeah, that would have to be nefarious, right? It's not that they're receiving threats and nasty calls from people like you can see undermining their credibility making them out tpo all be liars and hookers.
It could be nefarious. Their side had requested a warrant to get Watson's social media with the justification that he could destroy evidence. This implies that there was some understanding that the social media accounts were evidence. To then get rid of their social media accounts could be equated to destroying evidence.
They could have disabled notifications and changed phones without "scrubbing accounts."
Are you saying that it couldn't be nefarious? On what basis?
You say you don't know but seem to repeatedly imply they are liars, some type of hookers, are only in it for a money grab and an assortment of things that shed a negative light on these women. It's only obvious that if someone who claims they don't know actually means that, there would be a balance to their opinions that head in both directions. That hasn't been the case from you thus far.
All I've seen is how the fact there are 22 accusers doesn't mean anything. Make an inference that canceling their accounts is somehow a nefarious act. Insinuating they are hookers.
You see, making a disclaimer is only as good as what comes after that disclaimer. And making such a disclaimer doesn't even come close to the content of your posts on the topic.
And yes, with 22 accusers I do think he's guilty of at least some of the things he's being accused of. I'm not naive enough to try and convince myself that 22 women are just all making everything they're saying up. But then I've never tried to disguise or hide that by putting out some false disclaimer to say otherwise.
DeShaun Watson could be the devil in human flesh. The accusers could be saints.
Does my saying that make you feel better?
You say you are not naive, but the belief that 22 women that you've never met couldn't be lying seems rather naive to me. You're right that you've never tried to hide your opinion. But, not hiding them has no bearing on their accuracy or validity.
![[Linked Image from jdsupra-html-images.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com]](https://jdsupra-html-images.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/156331b6-e9e6-4038-9ce2-6e316d84cbd2-Bernie%20Sanders.flickrCC.Donkey%20Hotey.jpg)
![[Linked Image from spam.com]](https://www.spam.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/image-recipe_spam-breakfast-muffinwich-1000x500.jpg)
