The other thread is 10 pages long and will be locked. I'm hoping all those who are defending Watson go hard at the NFL for unfair practices when it comes to white owners vs black players.
This guy isn't the best speaker and had a fact or two wrong, but I get the gist of what he is saying. And I think a lot of black Americans get it. I especially am in favor of Watson's defense teams to push for full disclosure in all these other cases involving Snyder, Kraft, Jones, and even Irsay. I want the travesty of how Zeke's case highlighted. I want the leaking of Grudin's emails as a diversionary tactic to protect Snyder highlighted. I want the Flores lawsuit to be considered when it comes to the NFL and unfair practices. Enough is enough!
Do you think it was okay for Kraft to frequent a business that allegedly had women who were victims of the sex trafficking trade? Do you not understand from the articles I posted that advocates equate that to rape? And I am not accusing Kraft of rape, but those poor girls didn't have a choice. They were forced into it. Why frequent such places? How is that okay and what Watson did is not okay? And all we are asking for is full disclosure by the NFL and a fair and impartial judgement for both the owners and the players. Is that a travesty?
I knew this was where it was going. Nobody is ever responsible for anything. It's race-hustling BS.
I happen to agree that the Black community gets punished more for the same offenses, that they are not treated equally within the legal/judicial system. Statistics bear that out. But this is deflection and a fire drill to misdirect. I hope whoever is guilty of whatever is fully prosecuted - if it is Kraft, Snyder - whoever. Get em. The NFL misconduct policy is about bringing the NFL into a negative light. It spells out that the issues do not have to be criminal in nature. With 26 accusations and all the details we know - does anyone think Watson has not put the NFL in disrepute.
And Dave........I am not harassing you or attacking your opinion. I am asking honest questions. You know I like you and have reached out to you to see how you are doing. I am not attacking you. Just trying to get you to consider that by frequenting such a business, one is thereby enabling such practices. That can't be seen in a a positive light. It's downright sleazy if you ask me.
Oh, FFS! Of course its sleazy as hell. If you look up "sleazy" in the dictionary they might have pictures of Kraft, Snyder, and Jones. But frequenting a house, or parlor, of ill repute where you have no knowledge of the paid help's circumstances of employment is not in the same realm as 26 deposed, under oath, accusations of sexual abuse. I don't accept the equivalence, and I really regret that it has taken this turn towards the racial aspects. I don't think Watson's race has anything to do with the situation he is facing. I think it was his behavior that brought all this about.
It's not about "if he knew". It's about the results of his actions. His money went directly to a human trafficking ring.
And this?
Quote
His money went to a human trafficking ring. He's a celebrity. So his name is out there. Poor Robert Kraft....
If you buy weed and it comes from a Mexican cartel, it's not your fault you're supporting a Mexican cartel. Cause you didn't know where it came from, right?
And guess who said this?
Quote
I'll wait until more facts come out before I issue some huge moral judgement.
And this?
Quote
I don't have all the facts yet and my opinion can change. But, right now, I don't think what Kraft did is a big deal. In fact, I think it's only a big deal because he is such a large public figure.
I do think the issue of trafficking is very serious and is a huge concern in our society. I put it well above illegal immigration on the list of the things we must fix. It's like the dirtiest underside of our global society. It doesn't get any worse than that, especially because minors are often involved. I applaud folks like Hue Jackson who donated time and money to combat the travesty that is human trafficking.
But, as of right now, I don't think Kraft knew that was going on. I think he wanted to get laid and to that...I say big deal. In fact, we had a conversation on here years ago as to why don't people w/money [we were talking about NFL players at the time] just pay for sex instead of risking picking up some strange and then risking that strange accusing them of rape and/or abuse? Most of us don't see a problem w/people wanting to have sex. If you have money, prostitution is probably safer when you want some strange.
Now, if Kraft was aware of the trafficking aspect of this and that is why he went to that place..............my position will change dramatically. Until then, I don't like all the sensationalism.
So you can just lie now, making up racial hate where it doesn't exist AND crimes that weren't committed, to merely twist the narrative to your NARROW widely-unsupported view because you want to back a very convincing example of a sexual predator? And you go so low as to say it's a white-black thing when the white guys are getting drug through the same type of mud as the black guy? Yet the mounting evidence is overwhelming against the one you support, and pretty much doesn't exist against the others that you disparaged. Well, that doesn't sound very reasonable, rational, logical, fair, or decent of YOU, does it? And Vers, get bent w/your hypocrisy. AND LIES.
IMO this is a trial case for the NFL and the NFLPA.
With the new agreement in place it is not completely clear about appeal and challenge when a decision is made.
If as an example the process goes down and a one year suspension is given. The NFLPA will challenge the ruling. They will come back and site Kraft and Jerry Jones. That would mean opening those cases back up. A airing out in the public. The NFL does not want that.
So this becomes a test case.
I don't think any answer to this is automatic. People who think they know. Don't know.
There is a lot at stake here.
I don't have a clue. It has gotten to a point where I don't even know what justice should like like. "Personal Conduct Code" is vague and subjective.
If there were criminal charges it would be more clear.
In the case of DW and Kraft it is not a matter of comparison. It is a matter of personal conduct. None of it looks good. But if a ruling is made. It needs to be fair and balanced. You can not rule against DW and go blind to Kraft and Jones. Jones is the owner so him doing nothing in the "peeping Tom" case is being complicit.
Do you think it was okay for Kraft to frequent a business that allegedly had women who were victims of the sex trafficking trade? Do you not understand from the articles I posted that advocates equate that to rape? And I am not accusing Kraft of rape, but those poor girls didn't have a choice. They were forced into it. Why frequent such places? How is that okay and what Watson did is not okay? And all we are asking for is full disclosure by the NFL and a fair and impartial judgement for both the owners and the players. Is that a travesty?
Did the woman/women that provided service to Kraft ever complain?
I'm asking because I don't remember that happening. That does make it a little different I suppose. If he hadn't been caught, there would be no story.
Funny thing is this, Escort, Sugarbabies and such are everywhere... Guys like Watson and Kraft can afford to hire or engage with any of them and would probably never have an issue.
Neither escorts or SB's can speak up in public. Can't blackmail them because they are committing crimes themselves by offering such services..
For me, this is simple, Hire a Hooker.. Do your thing and walk away.
Did the woman/women that provided service to Kraft ever complain?
Could they even speak English? Did they fear for their lives if they spoke up? I don't know, but it's something to consider when these massage parlors are involved.
Quote
I'm asking because I don't remember that happening. That does make it a little different I suppose. If he hadn't been caught, there would be no story.
Funny thing is this, Escort, Sugarbabies and such are everywhere... Guys like Watson
and Kraft can afford to hire or engage with any of them and would probably never have an issue.
Neither escorts or SB's can speak up in public. Can't blackmail them because they are committing crimes themselves by offering such services..
For me, this is simple, Hire a Hooker.. Do your thing and walk away.
These oriental massage parlors are a little different than escorts and sugar babies.
Do you think it was okay for Kraft to frequent a business that allegedly had women who were victims of the sex trafficking trade? Do you not understand from the articles I posted that advocates equate that to rape? And I am not accusing Kraft of rape, but those poor girls didn't have a choice. They were forced into it. Why frequent such places? How is that okay and what Watson did is not okay? And all we are asking for is full disclosure by the NFL and a fair and impartial judgement for both the owners and the players. Is that a travesty?
Who is this "we" you are speaking of? Can you tell me if the massage parlor in question was charged or convicted of sex trafficking? I can tell you. I can also tell you that saying the video was destroyed is a lie. The video was not allowed in as evidence. Charges were dropped against all of more than 20 men charged, not just Kraft and the acts were consensual. So no, not even the massage parlor was convicted or even charged with sex trafficking. It was and always has been called a prostitution ring by law enforcement.
Do you think it was okay for Kraft to frequent a business that allegedly had women who were victims of the sex trafficking trade? Do you not understand from the articles I posted that advocates equate that to rape? And I am not accusing Kraft of rape, but those poor girls didn't have a choice. They were forced into it. Why frequent such places? How is that okay and what Watson did is not okay? And all we are asking for is full disclosure by the NFL and a fair and impartial judgement for both the owners and the players. Is that a travesty?
Who is this "we" you are speaking of? Can you tell me if the massage parlor in question was charged or convicted of sex trafficking? I can tell you. I can also tell you that saying the video was destroyed is a lie. The video was not allowed in as evidence. Charges were dropped against all of more than 20 men charged, not just Kraft and the acts were consensual. So no, not even the massage parlor was convicted or even charged with sex trafficking. It was and always has been called a prostitution ring by law enforcement.
Hmmmmm.........
Quote
Guess who said this?
Quote It's not about "if he knew". It's about the results of his actions. His money went directly to a human trafficking ring.
And this?
Quote His money went to a human trafficking ring. He's a celebrity. So his name is out there. Poor Robert Kraft....
If you buy weed and it comes from a Mexican cartel, it's not your fault you're supporting a Mexican cartel. Cause you didn't know where it came from, right?
JMHO, this saga we are in is going to get real messy. We have white billionaires/ or close on one side who got slaps on the wrist for sexual issues. I will grant you the numbers are different, but old adage - money talks and [censored] walks seems to be in play. Multi-Super Bowl winner owner, Kraft, get off on tech. issue- everyone knows he was guilty, yet he walks with NOTHING. A several hundred million dollar black man, whose sexual value system isn't like white society- he who broke NO laws, he POSSIBLY will lose a whole years worth of employment because he likes sex......burn all men who like sex. His lawyers, with a large bankroll are going to have a field day with the NFL. This situation stinks at every level.....but, remember, smile, the lawyers win always......Go Browns!!!!
JMHO, you are naive to think white and black society are the same regarding sex. How can a masseuse have issues with ANY body part. If a penis is seen or touched- dear God, it is the end of the world. We, the white society, are judging him with know LITTLE of what happen or his concept of right or wrong---are their any nudist in the world/ doing things lot "worst" than seeing or touching a penis- are they being convicted by public and denied right to work.....and the white zillionaires get a walk.....this whole thing is baloney. Lawyers win, they are laughing all the way to the banks. Go Browns!!!
Nobody cares if he had sex, they care if he's a predator. What's so hard to understand about that? And this black-white BS on this is borderline idiocy. None of them had any business doing it, but Kraft didn't get accused of unwanted advances or taking advantage of situations he arranged, like Cosby. No that's DW. But you are right about him having odd sexual behavior, but I doubt many black people approve of what he was doing either. They may defend him because he's a black athlete and thinks he's being wronged, but not on his actions that I've seen. I think it's shameful you tried to word it as cultural differences. That's a crock.
Perhaps we should allow the legal system to determine innocence or guilt instead of pretending we are omniscient and burning witches at the stake in the court of public opinion? I think it is shameful for people to be so adamant about assigning guilt and trashing anyone who wishes to allow the legal system to handle the legal proceedings.
OCD, just for your info. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4016194/, lots of studies show black teens engage in sex earlier, with more partners, and have less social stigma against sex than other ethnic groups- in order- blacks, hispanics, whites, asians. That's just one study.....there are lots....it isn't a new problem....decades...maybe centuries. Some public housing situations are more like government funded cat houses....studies of biological offspring would be useful. I'd ask you or anyone, what is normal? We, humans, are real diverse- we have problems about who can use which bathroom due to various plumbing. Again, I strongly state white money gets favored treatment- our politics shows that too- NFL has a huge snake bag and it is going to bite them. JMHO, Watson should have NO punishment- not because he is pure as snow, but because he's human AND he broke no laws. He broke white Puritan values, but has not broken legal laws....that we know of.....Go Browns!!!
Amen to that. Guilty, prove your innocence- that's the law of the land. Right. Except if you're a white billionaire ex-president who is above the law...oops, sorry, different forum. Go Browns!!!
OCD, just for your info. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4016194/, lots of studies show black teens engage in sex earlier, with more partners, and have less social stigma against sex than other ethnic groups- in order- blacks, hispanics, whites, asians. That's just one study.....there are lots....it isn't a new problem....decades...maybe centuries. Some public housing situations are more like government funded cat houses....studies of biological offspring would be useful. I'd ask you or anyone, what is normal? We, humans, are real diverse- we have problems about who can use which bathroom due to various plumbing. Again, I strongly state white money gets favored treatment- our politics shows that too- NFL has a huge snake bag and it is going to bite them. JMHO, Watson should have NO punishment- not because he is pure as snow, but because he's human AND he broke no laws. He broke white Puritan values, but has not broken legal laws....that we know of.....Go Browns!!!
Had all 26 (or should I say 66) women he used as masseuses white skin? If not then your logic makes no sense.
Why making this a race issue when it’s a question about a man who used his fame and power in the wrong way and made at least 26 women so uncomfortable that they decided to sue him. Just show me one single man in the whole world who’s sued by 26 women for sexual misconduct. Just one so we have something to compare with.
OCD, just for your info. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4016194/, lots of studies show black teens engage in sex earlier, with more partners, and have less social stigma against sex than other ethnic groups- in order- blacks, hispanics, whites, asians. That's just one study.....there are lots....it isn't a new problem....decades...maybe centuries. Some public housing situations are more like government funded cat houses....studies of biological offspring would be useful. I'd ask you or anyone, what is normal? We, humans, are real diverse- we have problems about who can use which bathroom due to various plumbing. Again, I strongly state white money gets favored treatment- our politics shows that too- NFL has a huge snake bag and it is going to bite them. JMHO, Watson should have NO punishment- not because he is pure as snow, but because he's human AND he broke no laws. He broke white Puritan values, but has not broken legal laws....that we know of.....Go Browns!!!
Had all 26 (or should I say 66) women he used as masseuses white skin? If not then your logic makes no sense.
Why making this a race issue when it’s a question about a man who used his fame and power in the wrong way and made at least 26 women so uncomfortable that they decided to sue him. Just show me one single man in the whole world who’s sued by 26 women for sexual misconduct. Just one so we have something to compare with.
Non consensual, unwelcome, forced, manipulated sexual activity is not acceptable. Using race as a basis for trying to justify it is wrong.
Oh, FFS! Of course its sleazy as hell. If you look up "sleazy" in the dictionary they might have pictures of Kraft, Snyder, and Jones. But frequenting a house, or parlor, of ill repute where you have no knowledge of the paid help's circumstances of employment is not in the same realm as 26 deposed, under oath, accusations of sexual abuse. I don't accept the equivalence, and I really regret that it has taken this turn towards the racial aspects. I don't think Watson's race has anything to do with the situation he is facing. I think it was his behavior that brought all this about.
IMO, the Kraft situation and the Watson situation are clearly not totally equivalent. I'm no lawyer, but I'd be willing to bet there's enough separating the two to kneecap any sort of 'whattabout' defense that the NFLPA is reportedly working on.
But for this board (again IMO), it's a worthy comparison given the VERY different treatment both are getting. I find it legitimately funny that we have people making the argument that Watson should be locked up and thrown away the key while ignoring that Kraft got off with basically no punishment. Neither cases had enough evidence come forward to justify bigtime punishment, but Kraft seems to be the only one able to benefit. One situation was swept under the rug because people assume that consent was a non-issue, but people have their pitchforks and torches out because they assume consent was an issue with Watson.
I don't think anyone says Kraft should have got away with anything. I think if Kraft was the Browns owner there would be much more discussion and opinion expressed.
And saying they are not totally equivalent does not do relative situations justice. One is alleged to have sexually assaulted multiple women. At worst coerced and used his power and influence to intimidate them into non-consensual sexual acts .... the other was at one time alleged to have solicited prostitution. Those are not the same.
We had one poster deceitfully try to frame the discussion about one case being sex trafficking, and ignoring that while "crucifying" Watson.... that is not the situation, it never was, it's a flat lie and manipulation.
I've said I hope Kraft and any other owner that transgresses the law gets punished to the full and appropriate extent of the law. I've said if Watson had sought and found consensual partners even if he paid them, I would not care.
Amen to that. Guilty, prove your innocence- that's the law of the land. Right. Except if you're a white billionaire ex-president who is above the law...oops, sorry, different forum. Go Browns!!!
In a sport where fans consider they no longer want you on their team when you ask for a trade the idea that you must be found guilty in court of 26 SA lawsuits before fans can make the same statement is just crazy.
So you quote a video where even the massage parlor wasn't charged with or convicted of human trafficking... then once again post and act like it had something to do with human trafficking. lmao
Why are posters permitted to continue to lie about what another says? 888 has repeatedly misrepresented my intent. I explained myself several times. Had I believed what he claims, I would have said it. I am not shy about stating my opinions and I could care less of what the likes of him and Pit think. Yet, he continues to spin his lie over and over. He does so to convince others of things that are not true and to win some stupid board argument. That is underhanded and weird, as is the countess time he spends on me each and every single day. Damn, get a life.
One is alleged to have sexually assaulted multiple women. At worst coerced and used his power and influence to intimidate them into non-consensual sexual acts .... the other was at one time alleged to have solicited prostitution. Those are not the same.
Only if you assume Kraft had no knowledge or suspicion that sex trafficking was going on. THAT is the crux of my point. One got the benefit of the doubt, while the other one probably won't. Of all the things we've been tearing each other up over, I think there's actually something to unpack here.
You do realize that the massage parlor was not charged with nor convicted of sex trafficking, right? I felt the exact same way with my initial feelings on the matter. But as more and more information came out, I realized there was no basis for such allegations. Soliciting prostitution is a crime. I believe Kraft got off easier than he should have. But I've seen no basis after everything unfolded to indicate this was some human/sex trafficking ring.
No, it was not destroyed. I actually have no idea where people got that from. It was simply not allowed into evidence. The videos were actually conducted by the police themselves. But the court ruled they could not be entered into evidence. So I guess if you consider it a lack of evidence because a judge wouldn't allow them to use it, then yes, possibly. But there was no destruction of the video. Unless it happened after it was decided it could not be used in court.
Kraft also did not have women accusing him and suing him for sexual misconduct. Not even one, much less 24..... and counting. As far as I know, nobody has sued the massage parlor for sex trafficking or sexual abuse either.
So it was court ordered after a judge said it could not be used as evidence. I thought you were suggesting it was destroyed to prevent it from being used in court. As I suggested might be the case above.....
Quote
But there was no destruction of the video. Unless it happened after it was decided it could not be used in court.
Quote It's not about "if he knew". It's about the results of his actions. His money went directly to a human trafficking ring.
And this?
Quote His money went to a human trafficking ring. He's a celebrity. So his name is out there. Poor Robert Kraft....
If you buy weed and it comes from a Mexican cartel, it's not your fault you're supporting a Mexican cartel. Cause you didn't know where it came from, right?
You see, some people actually consider things as they unfold. Sometimes their initial gut reaction to things isn't the final conclusion they reach as they learn more. Surely as a teacher you expect people to be open to that, right? I mean surely you aren't trying to say that no matter what we learn we should stick steadfast to what we initially thought, right?
And then sometimes as things unfold the facts that come out only reinforce our initial gut instincts to solidify them.
It seems you expect people ignore facts and evidence as it unfolds and try to attack people who do not.
As someone who's been banging the drum about the difficulties of women accusing men (especially powerful men) of this stuff, I find your citing a lack of accusations a little curious. On top of that, many of these women couldn't speak English.
I'll circle back and try to restate what I said before.
The two situations are nowhere near as close as defenders of Watson would like, but also not as different as people who want to nail Watson to the wall would lead you to believe. Again, I'm not commenting on Watson's situation, just the difference in how it's being treated compared to Kraft's and not being able to square away that difference with the facts available.
Kraft got caught up in a sex trafficking investigation. Alleged video evidence was suppressed. Kraft got away due to a lack of evidence. Watson is facing civil lawsuits, and one of the things people rail on is the difficulty in producing evidence of said crimes.
When cops were talking to the masseuses at Kraft's joint, they couldn't get reliable evidence due to language barrier. Earlier on in all the articles talking about this, it's cited that sex traffickers use fear/intimidation/violence to frighten the trafficked into silence. Folks who want Watson to hang frequently mention how difficult it is on the accusers to step forward.
Kraft was charged, but those didn't stick. Watson wasn't charged, but apparently that means nothing.
Kraft was let off with less than a slap on the wrist, while Watson is looking at 'an unprecendented punishment'.... This is despite both being under the same Personal Conduct policy and both not under any punishment on the legal side of things.
I encourage everyone to read the articles I posted on the previous thread about Kraft and the sex trafficking trade. I encourage everyone to just do a simple search about "robert kraft and sex trafficking." Read the dozens and dozens of articles on the topic. Proving things are difficult for those trying to go after the sex trafficking trade. Educate yourselves. No need to believe me or Pit. Decide for yourselves.
With that said, I am not saying Kraft is guilty just like I won't say Watson is guilty. I leave legal matters up to the courts and don't go around trying to hunt witches like many others do. I won't use words like "predator" or "rapist" when to convince others of another man's guilt.
What I will say is this. The NFL is NOT the legal system. I think it's wrong for them to act as investigator, judge, jury, and executioner in these types of cases. However, as it currently stands, they have the Personal Conduct Policy in place. All I--and many others--are asking is for the NFL to follow its own stated policy of "Everyone who is part of the league must refrain from “conduct detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in” the NFL. This includes owners, coaches, players, other team employees, game officials, and employees of the league office, NFL Films, NFL Network, or any other NFL business."
There can be little doubt that Watson's situation can be seen as detrimental to the integrity of the league. However, the situations w/Kraft, Snyder, Jones, and Irsay also have eroded the integrity of the league. We ask that the discipline be fair and equitable rather than allowing some to walk away w/out even a bad word while throwing the hammer down on someone else.
If the NFL doesn't want to play fairly, we suggest that they be held accountable for their misdeeds and unfair practices. We demand full disclosure in all of these cases so that the public is rightfully informed of how the NFL handles its business. I'd love to see what the federal courts would have to say if there is an internal investigation of the NFL and it's unfair and biased investigations of personal conduct policies.
First I have stated that I thought Kraft got off too easy. I'm sure there was a language barrier when the cops were talking to the masseuses at the scene. But let's not pretend the prosecutor did not get an interpreter and question all of these women for the trial involving the massage parlor. If she didn't she should have been fired.
The conduct policy is the same. The infractions are not. I known the numbers 24 and counting mean little or nothing to some. Not so for others.
Did the woman/women that provided service to Kraft ever complain?
Could they even speak English? Did they fear for their lives if they spoke up? I don't know, but it's something to consider when these massage parlors are involved.
Quote
I'm asking because I don't remember that happening. That does make it a little different I suppose. If he hadn't been caught, there would be no story.
Funny thing is this, Escort, Sugarbabies and such are everywhere... Guys like Watson
and Kraft can afford to hire or engage with any of them and would probably never have an issue.
Neither escorts or SB's can speak up in public. Can't blackmail them because they are committing crimes themselves by offering such services..
For me, this is simple, Hire a Hooker.. Do your thing and walk away.
These oriental massage parlors are a little different than escorts and sugar babies.
Whether they spoke english is not the point.. we don't know if all the ladies in the Watson case can speak english..
As for the Sugarbabies or Escorts,, the end result is the same, and it's "HAPPY"!
It was an investigation of sex trafficking in the area. Over 300 arrests were made at other locations where it was found to be true. No arrests were made for it at the spa Kraft was caught in. As long as we don't lead people to believe the words being mentioned in the same articles end up meaning anything. Because they actually don't.
It's too bad the NFLPA agreed to and the players sign a contract agreeing to allow the NFL to "act as investigator, judge, jury, and executioner in these types of cases." But no acountabilty for that either I see.
Twenty-four women are a lot, but let's consider the number of victims of the illegal sex trafficking just for a moment.
Quote
With an estimated 24.9 million victims worldwide at any given time, human traffickers prey on adults and children of all ages, backgrounds, and nationalities, exploiting them for their own profit.
Full article:
HomeFederal Response on Human Trafficking About Human Trafficking About Human Trafficking Share
Human trafficking, also called trafficking in persons, has no place in our world. As both a grave crime and a human rights abuse, it compromises national and economic security, undermines the rule of law, and harms the well-being of individuals and communities everywhere. It is a crime of exploitation; traffickers profit at the expense of their victims by compelling them to perform labor or to engage in commercial sex in every region of the United States and around the world. With an estimated 24.9 million victims worldwide at any given time, human traffickers prey on adults and children of all ages, backgrounds, and nationalities, exploiting them for their own profit.
In the United States, traffickers compel victims to engage in commercial sex and to work in both legal and illicit industries and sectors, including in hospitality, traveling sales crews, agriculture, janitorial services, construction, landscaping, restaurants, factories, care for persons with disabilities, salon services, massage parlors, retail services, fairs and carnivals, peddling and begging, drug smuggling and distribution, religious institutions, child care, and domestic work.
Forms of Human Trafficking* Forced Labor: The term forced labor** is defined in two separate sections of the U.S. Code. In the criminal statutes of Title 18, it encompasses the range of activities – recruiting, harboring, transporting, providing, or obtaining – involved when a person uses force or physical threats; psychological coercion; abuse of the legal process; a scheme, plan, or pattern intended to hold a person in fear of serious harm; or other coercive means to compel someone to work. Once a person’s labor is obtained by such means, the person’s previous consent or effort to obtain employment with the trafficker does not preclude the person from being considered a victim, or the government from prosecuting the offender. In the customs-related statute of Title 19, it is also defined in connection with the prohibition on the importation of goods produced wholly or in part by forced labor, including forced child labor; convict labor; and indentured labor under penal sanctions.
Debt Bondage: U.S. law prohibits the use of a debt as a form of coercion to compel a person’s labor. Some workers fall victim to traffickers or recruiters who unlawfully exploit an initial debt assumed as a condition of employment, while in certain countries some workers “inherit” the debt. Although contract violations and hazardous working conditions for migrant laborers do not in themselves constitute human trafficking, the imposition of costs and debts on these laborers can contribute to a situation of debt bondage. In other cases, employment-based temporary work programs in which the workers’ legal status in the country is tied to a particular employer present challenges to workers who would like to flee from such an employer.
Domestic Servitude: Working in a private residence can create unique vulnerabilities, particularly because what happens in a private residence often is hidden from the world, and it is easy to isolate a worker in a private residence. Domestic workplaces are often informal, connected to off-duty living quarters, and not shared with other workers. Such an environment is conducive to exploitation because authorities cannot inspect private homes as easily as formal workplaces. The use of informal, or even verbal, employment contracts compounds vulnerability. Foreign domestic workers are particularly vulnerable to abuse due to factors such as language and cultural barriers and lack of community ties.
Forced Child Labor: Although children may legally engage in certain forms of work, forms of slavery or slave-like practices – including the sale of children for exploitation, forced or compulsory child labor, and debt bondage and serfdom of children – continue to exist, despite legal prohibitions and widespread condemnation.
Sex Trafficking: When a person is required to engage in a commercial sex act as the result of force, threats of force, fraud, coercion or any combination of such means, that person is a victim of human trafficking. Under such circumstances, perpetrators involved in recruiting, enticing, harboring, transporting, providing, obtaining, advertising, maintaining, patronizing, or soliciting a person for that purpose are guilty of the federal crime of sex trafficking. This is true even if the victim previously consented to engage in commercial sex.
Child Sex Trafficking: Any child (under the age of 18) who has been recruited, enticed, harbored, transported, provided, obtained, advertised, maintained, patronized, or solicited to engage in a commercial sex act is a victim of human trafficking regardless of whether or not force, fraud, or coercion is used. The use of children in the commercial sex trade is prohibited both under U.S. law and by legislation in most countries around the world.
Prosecution, Protection, Prevention, and Partnership The “3P” paradigm—prosecution, protection, and prevention—continues to serve as the fundamental framework used around the world to combat human trafficking. The United States also follows this approach, reflected in the United States’ Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 , as amended (TVPA), and in the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (Palermo Protocol) . In addition, a fourth “P”—for partnership—serves as a complementary means to achieve progress across the 3Ps and enlist all segments of society in the fight against human trafficking.
Victims of Human Trafficking Human trafficking victims can be of any age, race, ethnicity, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, nationality, immigration status, cultural background, religion, socio-economic class, and education attainment level. In the United States, individuals vulnerable to human trafficking include children in the child welfare and juvenile justice systems, including foster care; runaway and homeless youth; unaccompanied foreign national children without lawful immigration status; individuals seeking asylum; American Indians and Alaska Natives, particularly women and girls; individuals with substance use issues; racial or ethnic minorities; migrant laborers, including undocumented workers and participants in visa programs for temporary workers; foreign national domestic workers in diplomatic households; persons with limited English proficiency; persons with disabilities; LGBT+ individuals; and victims of intimate partner violence or other forms of domestic violence.
Who are the Traffickers? At the heart of this phenomenon is the traffickers’ aim to profit from the exploitation of their victims and the myriad coercive and deceptive practices they use to do so. Traffickers can be strangers, acquaintances, or even family members, and they prey on the vulnerable and on those seeking opportunities to build for themselves a brighter future.
Human Trafficking vs. Migrant Smuggling Human traffickers respect no boundaries. The crime can include, but does not require, movement. Human trafficking is distinct from the separate crime of migrant smuggling. Human trafficking occurs when a trafficker uses force, fraud, or coercion to compel another person to work or engage in a commercial sex act, and does not require crossing a border. By contrast, migrant smugglers engage in the crime of bringing people across international borders through deliberate evasion of immigration laws. While these are distinct crimes, individuals who are smuggled may become vulnerable to and victims of human trafficking.
How Many Victims of Human Trafficking Are There? It is hard to find reliable statistics related to human trafficking. The quality and quantity of data available are often hampered by the hidden nature of the crime, challenges in identifying individual victims, gaps in data accuracy and completeness, and significant barriers regarding the sharing of victim information among various stakeholders. For these reasons, data and statistics may not reflect the full nature or scope of the problem.
In February 2020, the Senior Policy Operating Group (SPOG) Public Awareness & Outreach Committee created a Guide for Public Awareness Materials (non-binding) to serve as a public resource that reflects the common messaging, standard statistics, and shared guidelines on images that SPOG agencies use when creating public awareness and training materials. The following reflects standard statistics used by the U.S. government:
International Labour Organization The International Labour Organization (ILO) and the Walk Free Foundation, in partnership with the International Organization for Migration (IOM), released Global Estimates of Modern Slavery in September 2017. This report estimates that, at any given time in 2016, approximately 24.9 million people were in forced labor. Of these, “16 million were in the private economy, another 4.8 million were in forced sexual exploitation, and 4.1 million were in forced labour imposed by state authorities.” The definition of forced labor used in this report is based on ILO Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), which states in Article 2.1 that forced labor is “all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily.”
This report also estimates that 40 million people were in “modern slavery” at any given time in 2016, but this figure includes both the estimate for forced labor and an estimate for forced marriage. Consistent with current implementation of U.S. law, it is recommended to use only the 24.9 million estimate when referring to human trafficking. While some instances of forced marriage may meet the international or U.S. legal definition of human trafficking, not all cases do. Note further that the term “modern slavery” is not defined in international or U.S. law.
National Human Trafficking Hotline The National Human Trafficking Hotline provides on its website data sets on the issue of human trafficking in the United States. These data sets are based on aggregated information learned through phone calls, emails, online tips, and texts the hotline receives and should not be confused with prevalence studies or closed-out confirmed cases. Note that the hotline receives several types of calls in addition to those about human trafficking cases. The hotline does not verify the accuracy of information reported, but it determines on a case-by-case basis whether the information should be passed on to an appropriate local, state, or federal investigative and/or service agency equipped to investigate the tip and/or respond to the needs of the potential victim.
Annual Federal Reports The U.S. narrative in the U.S. Department of State’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report and the Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons include updated federal statistics.
That's not what I meant at all. I simply mean it has a greater influence on the opinion of some than it does others. Some put more gravity in it than others. It seems you took that comment differently than I intended it.
Sex trafficking is a terrible thing and a crime. It's just not a crime when it didn't happen. It's not something you can just go around throwing against a wall and hoping it sticks in every case where it doesn't apply to try and bait the conversation away from the actual topic at hand and think everyone is just going to buy into it.
Perhaps we should allow the legal system to determine innocence or guilt instead of pretending we are omniscient and burning witches at the stake in the court of public opinion? I think it is shameful for people to be so adamant about assigning guilt and trashing anyone who wishes to allow the legal system to handle the legal proceedings.
Nobody is preventing that, but we can all express our opinions.
Watson has not been charged w/a crime. Kraft has not been charged w/a crime. Somehow, one is guilty even and the other is innocent. LMAO-------folks just making up their own rules.
Raise your hand if you said Watson is guilty and Kraft is innocent.
There was this.
Quote
Sex trafficking is a terrible thing and a crime. It's just not a crime when it didn't happen.
And how many times have we heard that Watson not being charged w/a crime doesn't prove his innocence?
You don't like their tactics in the Political forum when they twist your words, make up things that you never said, move the goal posts, etc........yet, you really believe they are different people in this forum and the PFF? LMAO man.
No crap! Never said he was. I said neither was convicted of a crime. Jesus, you sound just like those guys.
And again............I am NOT saying anyone is guilty or innocent. I have maintained that from the beginning and I said it years ago in the Kraft thread.
My argument is about the punishment handed out by the NFL because of their Personal Conduct Policy. Both men were accused of crimes and both men brought negative attention to the league. Furthermore, the issues w/Snyder run far, far deeper.
Furthermore, I was not even talking to you. You have interjected yourself into my conversations quite a bit lately. Like your stupid over and over and over post. Yet, you never say a word when we heard 22 times over and over and over again. I didn't seek you out and call you out. I am responding to you calling me out. You did the same crap w/Baker back in the day. Siding w/the board bullies. Now, be like Pit and play Last Word Larry and I'll move on. Not interested in talking to you again. Take your football question to 888.
No crap! Never said he was. I said neither was convicted of a crime. Jesus, you sound just like those guys.
And again............I am NOT saying anyone is guilty or innocent. I have maintained that from the beginning and I said it years ago in the Kraft thread.
My argument is about the punishment handed out by the NFL because of their Personal Conduct Policy. Both men were accused of crimes and both men brought negative attention to the league. Furthermore, the issues w/Snyder run far, far deeper.
THIS IS WHAT YOU WROTE WHEN DISCUSSING KRAFT AND WATSON:
Originally Posted by Versatile Dog
Not surprised that some will overlook sex trafficking in one case and crucify a man in another case. And OCD, get bent w/your hypocrisy.
Sure as hell sounds, looks, reads like you absolutely framed the discussion as if Kraft was involved with sex trafficking. That's your words, in context. You would call other posters that did that LIARS. That's how you roll.
Why are posters permitted to continue to lie about what another says? 888 has repeatedly misrepresented my intent. I explained myself several times. Had I believed what he claims, I would have said it. I am not shy about stating my opinions and I could care less of what the likes of him and Pit think. Yet, he continues to spin his lie over and over. He does so to convince others of things that are not true and to win some stupid board argument. That is underhanded and weird, as is the countess time he spends on me each and every single day. Damn, get a life.
No-one is lying about what you said but you. There was a conversation about Kraft's case and Watson's case .... your exact words are shown above. You can't put those back in the bottle.
And right on cue you cry victim and call others liar. You have no shame.
I bet I’m in your group you dislike. I don’t care in the slightest. You sound like your having a meltdown, lashing out because you can’t have your way, and trying to take our ball and go home. I’ve been told 1000 times if you don’t want unwanted comments, don’t post on a public discussion forum.
I have also agreed with some of your points as well as calling you out for what I see as you trying to bully posters. And nobody has been more active in the DW threads than you.
Who am I trying to bully. I don't even speak to 888 and Pit. Once in awhile, I will address the board after there are repeated lies being told about me. For example, the Kraft and sex trafficking lie. Everyone in the world knows he wasn't charged w/sex trafficking. To suggest he was would be ignorant. That isn't what I was doing. I was talking about him frequenting a place that was alleged to participate in sex trafficking. I posted numerous articles to back up my point. I have tried to clarify my position multiple times, yet he continues to say I am a liar. It gets old. So again, who am I bullying?
And bullies run in packs. I don't run w/any group. I stand alone w/my views. I don't jump in and join 3-5 others in piling on one particular poster. Guys who do that are the bullies.
Who am I trying to bully. I don't even speak to 888 and Pit.
No - but without reason and without justification when you get called out you say "liar liar" and resort to name calling. It's a tried and tested pattern we all see. Followed by overly nice posts to others praising them for their posts and fairness. We all see it and see right through you.
Thinking this isn't about race is nuts, JMHO, DW had consensual sex with some of the suers. If he'd force anyone don't you think they'd have had physical damage- all suers complain about psychological damage. Do you really think there are NO suers in the me too movement- they'll get money and I want mine. Billionaires and millionaires are NEVER approached/ or favored due to their money- it doesn't happen. Several of these extremely damaged women had MULTIPLE engagements- DW was absolutely terrible. This situation is just like our political problems- half see no issue, it is sexual/normal activity around massage parlors forever- these masseuses knew nothing about DW's reputation with other masseuses- they were always "professional" and parts of the human body are just not to be seen or touched- just terrible. Other side- white and money- white billionaires can do what they want AND the law doesn't apply to them, and white culture says going to massage parlors is ONLY for massage/ never shall sex happen, it can't.
Don't know how old you or most posters- veterans of Southeast Asia war, millions- many vets were exposed to Asian differences between sex and what Mom taught. Millions of guys went to massage parlors and most left with happy faces. Just saying there are huge sexual difference in our society. The line isn't black and white. DW should be held responsible just like the other rich guys.
Deshaun Watson, the Grand Jury System, and why the NFL should let him play football until there is an indictment, a trial verdict, a civil settlement, or he admits he did something wrong
The Deshaun Watson case continues to circulate through the news in and outside of the sports world. Watson, the former Houston, Texan quarterback, is now the assumed starting quarterback for the Cleveland Browns. The Browns, despite twenty-two (22) civil lawsuits against Watson, agreed to pay him a record breaking $230 million guarantee contract. The original twenty-two (22) lawsuits have grown to twenty-six (26) lawsuits, all alleging that Watson contacted massage therapist for their services, and at some point in time, coerced them to engage in inappropriate sexual conduct. The incidents allegedly occurred between March 2020 and March 2021.
Tony Buzbee, who is employed on a contingency fee, is representing all the women against Watson. At this point Watson has declined to settle any of the matters and two Texas Grand Juries declined to indict Watson on criminal charges related to these incidents. The NFL, correctly, hasn’t taken any action against him because, at this point, the only proof that something occurred is the victim’s statements and video interviewed, where Buzbee, who has contingent financial interest, likely prepared them for hours.
What to know about the Grand Jury System – What system does Pennsylvania and New Jersey use in criminal cases?
This case has raised many questions regarding Texas’ Grand Jury system, the burden of proof before a grand jury, and its procedures. Texas, like New Jersey, maintains a grand jury system. The role of a Grand Jury is to listen to the facts of the case and determine if probably cause exists for the charges alleged against the Defendant. Pennsylvania, unlike New Jersey and Texas, doesn’t employ this type of system. Criminal charges in the Commonwealth are initially brought before a District Magistrate or Municipal Court Judge (Philadelphia) to make a similar finding at the preliminary hearing.
What is the grand jury’s procedure and what is the prosecutor’s role before a grand jury?
In Texas, a Grand Jury is composed of twelve (12) persons who must be citizens of the county where the grand jury sits. In addition, grand jurors must satisfy the ability to write, read and have no disqualifying criminal convictions. The Texas grand jury must have at least nine (9) grand jurors to indict a case. Failure to achieve non-votes will result in a “No Bill”, which is what occurred in the Watson case.
During grand jury proceeding, prosecutors are permitted to recite the relevant facts to the grand jury so that they can decide if probable cause exists to indict. Prosecutors however may also present documents with testimony from witnesses, including the accused. Defense lawyers along with Judges are not present in the Grand Jury room. In Texas, only the following are permitted, grand jurors, the Prosecutor, witness, a stenographer, and bailiff.
While the accused may be called as a witness before the grand jury, he or she can invoke his/her right against self-incrimination (5th Amendment). All grand jury proceedings are secret, and Prosecutors are only permitted to share information obtained from a grand jury with another grand jury, law enforcement agency or another Prosecutor when they need their assistance with the case.
Grand jurors are allowed to ask questions of the Prosecutor and can request production of other evidence if they think they need it. Grand juries are not trials and Prosecutors are under no obligation to present any evidence which would be exculpate the accused or in some way prove innocence.
Watson faced two (2) grand juries and neither found that sufficient probable cause existed for the charges against him despite reviewing police reports and hearing testimony from witnesses. Watson, apparently invoked his 5th Amendment right during civil depositions, which occurred on the same day as the first grand jury convened. He allegedly answered questions, however, under oath, after the second grand jury declined to indict him.
Why can’t the NFL make a decision on this case?
At this point, the NFL has not any taken action against Watson despite an alleged detailed investigation. Further, Watson is not on paid leave (Commissioner’s Exempt List) despite the allegations.
The NFL’s personal conduct policy states that players, coaches, and team administration must refrain “from conduct detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in the NFL”. The policy goes on to say that conduct by anyone in the league that is illegal, violent, dangerous, or irresponsible, damages the reputation of others in the game and undercuts public respect and support for the NFL.
Players convicted of a crime or subject to a disposition of a criminal proceeding (alternative to conviction program) are subject to discipline. Even if conduct however doesn’t result in a criminal conviction, a player found to have engaged in any conduct which undermines the integrity of the NFL is subject to discipline.
Why should the NFL let Deshaun Watson play?
With that said, the NFL is in a very tough position as the grand Juries in Texas failed to find that probable cause existed to indict Watson. The evidence standard at a grand jury is much lower than what Prosecutors would need to convict him at trial. It is very similar to a civil standard and at this point Watson has yet to settle any of the cases against him. He and his attorney, Rusty Hardin, appear ready to take all matters to trial and only reportedly offered settlements to the alleged victims.
While the NFL policy seems clear that Watson’s alleged behavior, if true, violated league policy, there is no evidence other than the victims’ statements. Unlike other NFL players, such as Ray Rice (2014-suspended indefinitely for domestic violence caught on video); Adrian Peterson (2014-six (6) games-reckless assault of a minor); Greg Hardy (2015-four (4) games – assault and terroristic threats); Ezekiel Elliott (six (6) games – no criminal charges).
The Watson case may actually go to trial. There are no admissions from him, no physical evidence, but only alleged victim’s statements. It may be difficult for the NFL to take any action against him. If the NFL were to act, purely based on allegations and police reports, with as far as we know no real corroborating evidence (videos, recording, an indictment, civil verdict), the league is setting an extremely bad precedent! While I have not reviewed the NFL’s personal conduct policy at length, it would seem extremely unfair if a player could be discipline without some type of admission or finding of guilt. This would open the doors to possible player extortion in the future. Alleged victims could make allegation and players would face discipline even if the only proof was their statements and interview for which they were no doubt prepared for by attorneys who have a financial contingency interest.
Despite critics, the NFL should hold off taking any action against Watson until this matter is resolved. Waiting respects the victims and Watson’s rights. Premature punishment could not accurately reflect what actually occurred through an admission or what a judge or jury found occurred.
Who am I trying to bully. I don't even speak to 888 and Pit. Once in awhile, I will address the board after there are repeated lies being told about me. For example, the Kraft and sex trafficking lie. Everyone in the world knows he wasn't charged w/sex trafficking. To suggest he was would be ignorant. That isn't what I was doing. I was talking about him frequenting a place that was alleged to participate in sex trafficking. I posted numerous articles to back up my point. I have tried to clarify my position multiple times, yet he continues to say I am a liar. It gets old. So again, who am I bullying?
The way you treated Dave was like a bully, and the way you talked to Purp the other day was the same. You do it without realizing what you come across as I think, but go back and read your responses once in a while. You have a habit of attacking or belittling those who don't agree with you or don't share your views. And you do what 888 described often as well. I know I do that in PP, we all do, but not on the rest of the board. And you can be mad at me for pointing it out, or lump a group of us together under whatever label you want, but that doesn't change the fact that you create more friction than any NON-TROLL poster on the board. That's not me attacking you, it's just an honest observation Vers. You have every right to your opinion and to debate, but you get defensive at the drop of a pin. And then you lash out at everyone who disagrees, I have no idea why you feel the need to do that or if you even realize you do it. But you do it quite often. Not trying to offend you Vers, it is what it is.
I know PIT gets the same kind of rap, and his posting often annoys those he's debating, but in comparison, he's more honest in his self-reflection and owns it.
Deshaun Watson, the Grand Jury System, and why the NFL should let him play football until there is an indictment, a trial verdict, a civil settlement, or he admits he did something wrong
Why do you post the same article in two different threads?
Maybe you should direct your anger where it belongs. Against Deshaun Watson and the Cleveland Browns.
Anybody with 26 civil law suits hanging over their head regarding sexual harassment will be suspended or put on paid leaves by any professional employer until all the cases are solved. If the Cleveland Browns had any sort of back bone and a normal moral compass they would never sign a player with such a uncertain background until all the law suits are solved or the cases are financially settled. Look at the Miami Dolphins how they handled the problem. Just common sense. Can you honestly imagine a school teacher, a doctor, a nurse, a politician, a CEO or similar continue to work with so serious allegations hovering around their head. Off course not. Any sane person would be so distracted and worried about the future that working as normal isn’t possible. Not exactly rocket science to understand this. Only a narcissist would continue as normal but that’s off course not what he is, Watson, or?
Only the clowns from the Browns ignored all the warnings signs and moved on with a monster contract without using any sort of common sense. A pathetic press conference and some lame statements about investigations and how “comfortable” they all are.
Now the NFL has to deal with the Browns incompetence and that’s why this mess is a national debate with no winners.
All this started with one player using over 100 masseuses in a period less then 2 years. Not one single named NFL player has gone on record searching for similar services using almost hundred different masseuses when they seek happy endings, not even close, not before and not now.
Not one single named NFL player has gone on record searching for similar services using almost hundred different masseuses when they seek happy endings, not even close, not before and not now.
Did you seriously expect them too? Like a "hold my beer" situation?
Why do you post the same article in two different threads?
Others have done the same thing. Why is it a big deal now? But, to explain.......the article contained "legal" information and it also contained information about why the NFL would have a hard time keeping Watson from being our "starting qb" this upcoming season.
Once again, w/out determining the guilt or innocence of any of the owners or Watson, I see discrepancies in how punishment is doled out by the NFL when it comes to owners vs players. It's often been said that the NFL doesn't need a legal conviction to suspend/punish anyone because of the Personal Conduct Policy.
Here are the first two paragraphs of that policy.
Quote
It is a privilege to be part of the National Football League. Everyone who is part of the league must refrain from “conduct detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in” the NFL. This includes owners, coaches, players, other team employees, game officials, and employees of the league office, NFL Films, NFL Network, or any other NFL business.
Conduct by anyone in the league that is illegal, violent, dangerous, or irresponsible puts innocent victims at risk, damages the reputation of others in the game, and undercuts public respect and support for the NFL. We must endeavor at all times to be people of high character; we must show respect for others inside and outside our workplace; and we must strive to conduct ourselves in ways that favorably reflect on ourselves, our teams, the communities we represent, and the NFL.
Now, consider some of the public information regarding Daniel Snyder, the Washington Redskins, I mean, Commanders owner. How is being investigated by Congress for the alleged incidents described in the following article not in violation of the Personal Conduct policy?
Quote
Daniel Snyder Will Not Appear at House Oversight Committee Hearing, per Report
MADELINE COLEMANJUN 15, 2022
Commanders team owner Dan Snyder will not appear at the U.S. House of Representatives’ Committee on Oversight and Reform’s hearing on June 22, according to The Washington Post.
Via a four-page letter from his attorney, Snyder declined the request, which was made at the beginning of the month. The committee had requested that Snyder and NFL commissioner Roger Goodell testify in front of the committee concerning the investigation into the Commanders.
A spokesperson said to the Post, ”The Committee intends to move forward with this hearing. We are currently reviewing Mr. Snyder’s letter and will respond.”
The months-long probe that began in October 2021 is looking into the franchise’s workplace culture, how the league handled misconduct reports, “the NFL’s role in setting and enforcing standards across the League, and legislative reforms needed to address these issues across the NFL and other workplaces,” according to the committee’s press release from earlier this month.
The investigation was brought on after the Post published an article in July 2020 detailing workplace sexual harassment experienced by 15 former employees within the franchise. Snyder also faces several accounts of misconduct, some of which are as follows:
The Post released another article in 2020 reporting that a former senior executive instructed employees to create a behind-the-scenes video for Snyder. The video included videos of partially naked team cheerleaders from an ’08 team swimsuit calendar shoot. The Post previously reported that “lawyers and private investigators working on Snyder’s behalf took steps that potential witnesses … viewed as attempts to interfere with the NFL’s investigation.” The numerous alleged attempts to interfere included reaching a $1.6 million settlement with a former employee who described sexual misconduct by the co-owner and filing petitions to identify employees who had spoken to the Post. The committee held a hybrid roundtable with several former employees of the franchise, and Tiffani Johnston detailed new allegations that directly implicated Snyder.
“I learned that placing me strategically by the owner at a work dinner after this networking event was not for me to discuss business, but to allow him to place his hand on my thigh under the table,” Johnston said in her opening statement. “I learned how to discreetly remove a man’s unwanted hand from my thigh at a crowded dinner table, at a crowded restaurant to avoid a scene. I learned that job survival meant I should continue my conversation with another co-worker rather than to call out Dan Snyder right then, in the moment.
“I also learned later that evening how to awkwardly laugh while Dan Snyder aggressively pushed me towards his limo with his hand on my lower back, encouraging me to ride with him to my car. I learned how to continue to say no even though a situation was getting more awkward, uncomfortable and physical.”
The team owner denied the allegations in a statement.
Soon after the roundtable, the committee released documents provided to them by the league, which included a Common Interest Agreement between the NFL and Washington and an engagement letter between lawyer Beth Wilkinson’s firm and the franchise. It revealed that not only did Washington agree to a written report being created of Wilkinson’s findings and recommendations, but also that the league would not be able to release the findings without the permission of Snyder, according to the documents. Here is a summary of what was found in the documents.
Come April, the committee wrote an explosive letter to the Federal Trade Commission, asserting that the Commanders and Snyder “may have engaged in a troubling, long-running, and potentially unlawful pattern of financial conduct that victimized thousands of team fans and the National Football League.”
The letter, a copy of which was sent to Sports Illustrated, included testimony from former Washington sales executive Jason Friedman. Some of the instances cited are as follows.
Alleged misappropriation of funds, specifically withholding customers’ security deposits on premium seating and using the money for other purposes, that totaled “approximately $5 million” from “around 2,000 accounts.” Ticket revenue, which is supposed to be shared with the league, was underreported. Friedman said “the team maintained ‘two sets of books’—one that was shared with the NFL but underreported certain ticket revenue, and another internal set of books that included the complete and accurate revenue and was ‘shown to Mr. Snyder.’”
Here is more on the documents released by the committee, including details of the spreadsheet from Friedman, and how the former Washington sales executive said in his testimony that these financial practices began when things “started to get a little tougher for the team financially,”and noted they were encouraged by senior leadership, including Snyder.
Goodell said in March that Snyder “has not been involved in day-to-day operations.” He added, “Don’t believe he’s been at the team facility at all, and when we continue to have league matters, Tanya [Snyder] has represented the team as the CEO on both a day-to-day basis, but also here with the league.” In July 2021, Dan agreed to temporarily cede control of the team to his wife, Tanya, in wake of widespread controversy surrounding the franchise, of which he was at the center. The announcement came when the league partially released its findings from a workplace misconduct probe, levying a $10 million fine against the team.
Pursuing the path of how the unevenly NFL deals w/violations of its own Personal Conduct policy in regards to owners vs players is essential to Watson's defense.
Maybe the NFL can just fine Watson $10 million and not suspend him? That's what the NFL did w/Snyder. Here is a reaction from the plaintiff's attorneys after the NFL's decision.
Quote
USA TODAY reported that attorneys Lisa Banks and Debra Katz did not like the way the NFL handled the ruling and the process of the investigation, including the league not requiring Wilkinson to issue a written report.
"In response to a year-long investigation in which more than 100 witnesses were interviewed, and which we believe substantiated our clients' allegations of pervasive harassment, misogyny and abuse at the Washington Football Team, the NFL has chosen to protect owner Dan Snyder," Banks and Katz said in a statement to USA TODAY. "Ignoring our requests that it make the report prepared by Beth Wilkinson public, the NFL has chosen instead to receive only an oral report of the findings and to fine owner Dan Snyder what amount to pocket change.
"This is truly outrageous, and is a slap in the face to hundreds of women and former employees who came forward in good faith and at great personal risk to report a culture of abuse at all levels of the Team, including by Snyder himself. The NFL has effectively told survivors in this country and around the world that it does not care about them or credit their experiences. Female fans, and fans of goodwill everywhere, take note."
Why do you post the same article in two different threads?
Others have done the same thing. Why is it a big deal now? But, to explain.......the article contained "legal" information and it also contained information about why the NFL would have a hard time keeping Watson from being our "starting qb" this upcoming season.
No - it did not. It was an opinion piece - apparently by a legal firm, presumably trying to gain free PR and a reputation. The piece was based on the letter of the law - it did not relate to a private company with a conduct policy that is outside the legal system. But it did fit with your agenda, so I understand why you spammed it on two threads.
I think everyone agrees there has always been a disconnect between how the owners have been 'punished' - compared to how players have been dealt with. Not everyone agrees with your attempt to frame the Kraft case as being one of sex trafficking. Not everyone agrees that the Watson case is about race. As hard as you try to silence others and convert them to agree with your opinion - I don't think it's working.
It was a good article. It only needed to go n one thread. The poster was chastising an bullying others the other day for posting DIFFERENT stories containing DIFFERENT updates on the same thread. Now we have this. Personally I believe it is trolling behavior.
I wouldn't call it spamming. I liked the article and found it informative.
Just because you don't like it doesn't make it spam.
It's spam if you don't like the message. On the other hand, posting almost daily opinion articles from Florio or spin-offs of his articles from other sites are approved of if you agree w/their message. Once again, a few want to control what is said and not said on this board.
JMHO, lots of folks/posters keep typing about numbers- 10, 22, 60, 400? The number does not matter. DW employed masseuses and got massages. In some cases, he got more. He has done nothing criminal. He, may or may not, live by some societal unwritten taboos. Hell, decades ago we had a President who did not have sexual relations with an intern. Was he punished, lost his job? He could have 2,000 masseuses and double the massages if he paid for them and didn't commit a PROVEABLE crime. Do you really think the main lawyer for the ladies is just in it to right wrongs.....get real. Watson should play and if he doesn't, NFL is openning themselves up to litigation.
Trying real hard to understand this angle with Robert Kraft.
He caught two misdemeanor solicitation charges... that were dropped.
Nobody was suing him for sexual assault, harassment or misconduct.
What's the impetus for "punishment"?
I'm trying to find NFL players that have been suspended for solicitation, can't find any. Eugene Robinson was arrested less than 24 hours before the Super Bowl -- he was allowed to play in the game and was never suspended.
Seventeen members of the 2005 Vikings hired 90-110 prostitutes for their cruise on the "Love Boat"... no one was suspended.
In fact, I can only find one incident of someone being suspended in any sport... Darryl Strawberry... but there was more than the prostitute on his arm -- there was the bag of cocaine in his pocket -- again.
I think the biggest (obvious) difference is what we call the "victims". Are there any when a date with a prostitute goes wrong (or right, for that matter)? The prostitute is doing exactly what they expected they would be doing. Quite a bit different than being coerced into something they didn't expect to be doing, right?
Just curious, what do people think would have been the appropriate punishment for Kraft?
I wonder how many people have been suspended for getting massages?
Once again, the NFL is not the legal system. Thus far, none of these guys, whether it be Watson, Snyder, Kraft, Irsay, Jones, etc have been found guilty in a court of law. Well, maybe Irsay was....I can't really remember?
Thus, this always goes back to the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy and how the NFL doles out punishments. It's quite evident that all have violated some of the stipulations w/in the Personal Conduct policy. What's the right thing to do? I don't know............but, I do know how I would defend Watson should the NFL decide to punish him w/a severe suspension.
Trying real hard to understand this angle with Robert Kraft.
He caught two misdemeanor solicitation charges... that were dropped.
Nobody was suing him for sexual assault, harassment or misconduct.
What's the impetus for "punishment"?
I'm trying to find NFL players that have been suspended for solicitation, can't find any. Eugene Robinson was arrested less than 24 hours before the Super Bowl -- he was allowed to play in the game and was never suspended.
Seventeen members of the 2005 Vikings hired 90-110 prostitutes for their cruise on the "Love Boat"... no one was suspended.
In fact, I can only find one incident of someone being suspended in any sport... Darryl Strawberry... but there was more than the prostitute on his arm -- there was the bag of cocaine in his pocket -- again.
I think the biggest (obvious) difference is what we call the "victims". Are there any when a date with a prostitute goes wrong (or right, for that matter)? The prostitute is doing exactly what they expected they would be doing. Quite a bit different than being coerced into something they didn't expect to be doing, right?
Just curious, what do people think would have been the appropriate punishment for Kraft?
Initially vers tried to make the Kraft case about trafficking. That's just a flat out lie. Then it was a pivot to about fairness of owner vs player and race. As you just spelled out.... There is no angle with Kraft. Its deflection.
Watson has not been charged w/a crime. Kraft has not been charged w/a crime. Somehow, one is guilty even and the other is innocent. LMAO-------folks just making up their own rules.
Twenty four... 24.... and counting. I know that means nothing to you.
Sex trafficking is a terrible thing and a crime. It's just not a crime when it didn't happen.
And how many times have we heard that Watson not being charged w/a crime doesn't prove his innocence?
You don't like their tactics in the Political forum when they twist your words, make up things that you never said, move the goal posts, etc........yet, you really believe they are different people in this forum and the PFF? LMAO man.
No, you are not a different person in this forum and people don't like when you do it. I repeat, sex trafficking charges in this case would have had nothing to do with Kraft. It was the massage parlor itself that would have faced such charges but did not. It was an area wide investigation of several locations. In which over 300 charges were filed at other locations. But somehow this location was not charged with sex trafficking nor was anyone involved.
You conveniently forgot to mention that one of the two men have 24 incidents. Even though I know that's something you would like to ignore in your slanted view.
Who am I trying to bully. I don't even speak to 888 and Pit.
Yet you can't keep our names out of your mouth. You refuse to address us as men directly while saying things about us in general to everyone else. There's a name for that. Try to man up for as change.
I wouldn't call it spamming. I liked the article and found it informative.
Just because you don't like it doesn't make it spam.
It's spam if you don't like the message. On the other hand, posting almost daily opinion articles from Florio or spin-offs of his articles from other sites are approved of if you agree w/their message. Once again, a few want to control what is said and not said on this board.
As long as you're counting yourself as a part of the few.
Browns QB Deshaun Watson settles all but four of 24 lawsuits alleging sexual misconduct Brent Schrotenboer USA TODAY
Cleveland Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson has reached a confidential settlement with all but four of the 24 women who sued him and accused him of sexual misconduct during massage sessions in 2020 and early 2021, the women’s attorney said Tuesday.
The settlements end the women’s litigation against him nearly 15 months after most were filed in 2021.
“Today I announce that all cases against Deshaun Watson, with the exception of four, have settled,” plaintiffs attorney Tony Buzbee said in a statement. “We are working through the paperwork related to those settlements. Once we have done so, those particular cases will be dismissed. The terms and amounts of the settlements are confidential. We won’t comment further on the settlements or those cases.”
Settling the cases allows Watson to move on from litigation that generated regular ugly headlines about him, at least somewhat spoiling his recent arrival in Cleveland as the new $230 million quarterback of the Browns. Settling the cases also helps him avoid several days of deposition testimony that were scheduled for him this week. Those depositions are no longer going forward.
A big question now is how the settlement might affect any decision to suspend him under the NFL’s personal conduct policy. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said in May the investigation into the allegations against Watson was nearing an end, but it’s not clear what the league knew about two new lawsuits filed against Watson this year or information that came out of recent pretrial discovery.
Watson, 26, never was arrested or charged after two grand juries declined to indict him. There could have been several reasons the grand juries chose not to indict him, including a lack of hard evidence in these cases individually when Watson’s word was pitted against those of the women. Only one of the criminal complainants was called in to testify at the Harris County grand jury proceeding in March even though other complainants there were subpoenaed and ready to testify, Buzbee told USA TODAY Sports previously.
One of the cases that did not settle is the lawsuit of the first plaintiff to sue Watson, Ashley Solis. Buzbee said he looks forward to trying her case and the others remaining active in due course.
“The cases against Deshaun Watson started with one phone call, from one brave and strong woman,” Buzbee stated. “That woman was Ashley Solis. At the time of that call she was just one of the hundreds of calls seeking legal assistance that our firm gets weekly. Even though she was originally turned away by our screening process, my staff insisted that I personally speak with her. I’m glad she persisted. Once we took a second look, and after having contact with Watson’s original lawyer who disrespected Ashley and her profession and who arrogantly minimized the conduct of someone he referred to as an 'asset,' I was convinced that our law firm should try to help her.
“As a result of Ashley’s lone but brave voice, soon many women who had allegedly experienced the same conduct were emboldened to step forward. I am incredibly proud to represent them all. They have endured vile criticism and fanatical ignorance. They faced withering cross examination by skilled litigators and stood firm. They are warriors all. Today we have an important announcement about these cases, but it is important to point out that, without Ashley Solis, the conduct experienced by these women would likely have continued unfettered. The truth is, without her courage and willingness to come forward, the NFL wouldn’t currently be contemplating discipline; there would be no examination of how teams might knowingly or unknowingly enable certain behavior; sports teams wouldn’t be reviewing their personnel screening processes; and this important story wouldn’t have dominated the sports headlines for more than a year.”
I guess it's good that the Browns will probably have at least some amount of clarity on the status of their starting QB. IMO, confidentially settling the cases doesn't really bring much closure to the story. For me, I wanted to know how much of the allegations were true. I was hoping to get much more information than it looks like we're going to get. I've had a hard time imagining myself cheering for a guy that did the things included in the accusations.
I wonder how many people have been suspended for getting massages?
If that's what you think this is actually about, that's the problem here. How many people ejaculate on their massage therapists? How many people ask their message therapists to do this?
Quote
Massage Specialist victim says Deshaun Watson wanted her to massage inside his butt
There have been many accusations against Houston Texans quarterback Deshaun Watson but this one is pretty damning.
A massage therapist talks about a very strange encounter with the former Clemson quarterback. She says that Watson wanted her to massage his butt and inside his butt.
Well, this was a very important first step. I'm glad Watson became wise to the necessary protocol.
Some thoughts:
It would seem that cases settled would mean a more lenient suspension for Watson. Maybe not, but seems like common sense that "the shield" would have to respond differently with 26 cases hanging in the balance.
Over a month 'til TC... which many have seen as the NFL's "deadline"... I wonder if the other four cases will be settled before then?
Obviously there is some sort of NDA (something that was objected to in the past, during Miami's pursuit of Watson) as the "numbers" won't be disclosed.
This is the quickest path to Watson repairing his image (once the other four are settled), but it really has to begin with admitting wrongdoing and a heartfelt apology. Interested in seeing how that plays out. Dude was squeaky clean and an asset to his community before this trash.
The other four will probably hang on until Solis settles, as she is the face of the lawsuits and the first to come forward. I wonder what that will take, since her "demand" at the beginning of this sh*tshow was $100,000. I bet they're hung up on payment vs NDA as she could expect huge payouts in telling her story.
It is good that 20 women get some closure to their ordeal. As was stated when this all began with Cleveland, settling the cases is an important move for Watson and the Browns, so it's good to see we are at or near that point now.
i dunno how i feel about this. i understand that in cases like this, you gotta do what the lawyers say for the best outcome, but damn. morally, settling always seems like an admission of guilt. i get that some people do settle for the simple reason of not wasting time in court, but when it comes to sexual misconduct cases, it feels dirty.
I think you'll find that 100k wasn't her "demand". I think in fact she was one of the women who turned down a 100k settlement offer when Miami was considering trading for watson.
Quote
Terms of the settlements were not disclosed. Watson had previously offered each plaintiff $100,000 to settle, but those agreements were denied on the “aggressive” nature of the NDAs. Buzbee said that Solis' suit and three others' will continue. “As stated, Ashley Solis is one of the heroes of this story.
At least watson finally wised up and realized he couldn't win in court and this would drag out forever if he didn't settle with at least most of these women. While we may never know the exact amount, you can bet he paid out more than 100k each to these women. Things took a much bigger turn for the worse since the initial settlement offer.
i dunno how i feel about this. i understand that in cases like this, you gotta do what the lawyers say for the best outcome, but damn. morally, settling always seems like an admission of guilt. i get that some people do settle for the simple reason of not wasting time in court, but when it comes to sexual misconduct cases, it feels dirty.
You don’t have so many alternatives with such serious allegation. Finally someone inside Team Watson started to use their sense.
I would have to think this has been in the works for a while, 20+ settlements takes time. You can't get two people to agree on dinner half the time, much less to agree to settle lawsuits.
I hope this means that the NFLPA and Watson's defense team will go after the NFL hard for their biased and unfair treatment of owners vs players when it comes to the league's Personal Conduct policy. I look forward to seeing Watson on the field for the majority of this year's games.
Btw----there are still a handful of folks who refuse to acknowledge the difference between "alleged" and "convicted."
so what do you think? is this one of those situations where they got the vague accusations out the way, and are focused on maybe fighting the more serious allegations?
again, settling always seemed weird to me, in any situation.
I think it had far more to do with Watson and his lawyers getting absolutely destroyed in the court of public opinion. I don't think Watson or maybe his career could take another year+ of this limbo status.
I think it had far more to do with Watson and his lawyers getting absolutely destroyed in the court of public opinion. I don't think Watson or maybe his career could take another year+ of this limbo status.
I wonder if the economics came into it as well. I have no clue what Watson is paying his lawyers and for how long this could have dragged out, but what if the NFL said something like:
1. You can stop paying your lawyers this year, settle, and get docked pay on your $1.035MM salary for "insert game" suspension.
OR
2. You can continue to pay your lawyers through next year, fight the cases, and then get docked pay on your $46MM salary for "insert game" suspension.
I think you'll find that 100k wasn't her "demand". I think in fact she was one of the women who turned down a 100k settlement offer when Miami was considering trading for watson.
Quote
Terms of the settlements were not disclosed. Watson had previously offered each plaintiff $100,000 to settle, but those agreements were denied on the “aggressive” nature of the NDAs. Buzbee said that Solis' suit and three others' will continue. “As stated, Ashley Solis is one of the heroes of this story.
At least watson finally wised up and realized he couldn't win in court and this would drag out forever if he didn't settle with at least most of these women. While we may never know the exact amount, you can bet he paid out more than 100k each to these women. Things took a much bigger turn for the worse since the initial settlement offer.
Sounds more like a demand to my ears...
HOUSTON, Texas (KTRK) -- Shortly after Ashley Solis went public as one of the 22 women accusing Deshaun Watson of unwanted sexual acts, the Houston Texans quarterback's lawyer fired back at claims that she and fellow accusers aren't going after his money.
According to Rusty Hardin, Watson's attorney, Solis had demanded $100,000 to stay quiet about the allegations.
In a statement released Tuesday, Hardin said there are documents to prove Tony Buzbee, Solis' attorney, sought the hush money to quietly settle the allegations the month before he filed the first lawsuit in the middle of March 2021.
A Watson representative asked Buzbee and his firm "the rationale behind the $100k demand" given that "we don't believe that the alleged facts show that Deshaun did anything wrong," Hardin added.
Buzbee was stated as saying, "We made a legit demand. You rejected it. We won't be making another or bid against ourselves."
Watson, who faces 22 different civil lawsuits alleging sexual harassment, assault and misconduct, has denied wrongdoing since the first pieces of litigation emerged. Despite the highly graphic nature of the allegations, all happening during massage therapy sessions, Watson gained the support of 18 other professional masseuses who said their experience with the NFL star doesn't align with what the lawsuits state.
Late last week, Houston police said a report concerning Watson was filed, marking the first time law enforcement has been tied to an allegation in these cases. So far, HPD hasn't offered anything beyond receiving a report.
Here is Hardin's full statement after Buzbee's news conference on Tuesday:
In the hours after the revealing news conference, Rusty Hardin, the lawyer representing Watson, gave the following statement:
At a press conference today, attorney Anthony Buzbee introduced the first plaintiff to the media. She identified herself as Ashley Solis. In her remarks, Ms. Solis stated: "People say that I'm doing this just for money. That is false."
Mr. Buzbee himself repeatedly claimed that the litigation he filed on behalf of other Jane Does "isn't about money." At his initial press conference on March 19 announcing the first wave of lawsuits, Mr. Buzbee stated: "The case ain't about money. And it certainly ain't about seeking publicity or fame. I personally don't need it. And these women don't want it. This case is about female empowerment."
In fact, according to the documentation below, Mr. Buzbee sought $100,000 in hush money on behalf of Ms. Solis to quietly settle the allegations the month before he filed the first lawsuit.
"My client's demand is $100,000," Buzbee associate Cornelia Brandfield-Harvey wrote in a February 9, 2021 email on behalf of Ms. Solis. Ms. Brandfield-Harvey followed up with a clarification of the $100,000 demand later that same day. "This offer remains open until Friday of this week." Mr. Buzbee is copied on all of the emails.
The Watson representative who engaged in the discussions with Mr. Buzbee and his firm is Scott Gaffield, the General Counsel at the Athletes First agency of Laguna Beach.
On February 19, Mr. Gaffield responded to Mr. Buzbee and Ms. Brandfield-Harvey by inquiring about "the rationale behind the $100k demand" given that "we don't believe that the alleged facts show that Deshaun did anything wrong..."
Mr. Buzbee responded that same morning: "We made a legit demand. You rejected it. We won't be making another or bid against ourselves." He then added: "This is Houston, Texas. Perhaps you should find him a lawyer here so you can apprise both you and your client of the landscape here and who you are dealing with."
In a written statement, Mr. Gaffield said:
"My email exchanges with Mr. Buzbee and Ms. Brandfield-Harvey were very clear. We did not think that the facts showed that Deshaun did anything wrong with their client. We believed then - and fully believe now - that Deshaun learned a lesson about putting himself in this type of situation by interacting with people he does not know. As the emails show, we were willing to continue discussions on Deshaun's behalf to explore ways to prevent a lawsuit and a public spectacle. But Mr. Buzbee informed us that he was unwilling to do so. We expect that this matter will be resolved in court."
The email communications occurred between February 3 and February 19, 2021.
I think it had far more to do with Watson and his lawyers getting absolutely destroyed in the court of public opinion. I don't think Watson or maybe his career could take another year+ of this limbo status.
I wonder if the economics came into it as well. I have no clue what Watson is paying his lawyers and for how long this could have dragged out, but what if the NFL said something like:
1. You can stop paying your lawyers this year, settle, and get docked pay on your $1.035MM salary for "insert game" suspension.
OR
2. You can continue to pay your lawyers through next year, fight the cases, and then get docked pay on your $46MM salary for "insert game" suspension.
"Which makes more sense, Deshaun?"
I'm sure Deshaun was getting pressure from all sides, and a scenario such as yours makes a lot of sense.
so what do you think? is this one of those situations where they got the vague accusations out the way, and are focused on maybe fighting the more serious allegations?
again, settling always seemed weird to me, in any situation.
There are battles you can’t win, this was one of them.
By reducing the numbers of civil law suits Team Watson can argue that they at least acknowledges that something must be done to move forward. I still think a initial one year suspension is on the table but with 20 women willing to settle it’s more maneuver room for the NFL to maybe reduce the punishment and with that avoid a legal battle with the NFLPA.
i dunno how i feel about this. i understand that in cases like this, you gotta do what the lawyers say for the best outcome, but damn. morally, settling always seems like an admission of guilt. i get that some people do settle for the simple reason of not wasting time in court, but when it comes to sexual misconduct cases, it feels dirty.
I agree w/you on that. On the other hand, I feel that folks who start off by filing Civil court cases rather than criminal court cases is equally, if not more, dirty. I have felt that way for decades. Not saying I am right, but I don't think I'm alone on that one. Maybe on here....LOL.......but not in the real world.
Didn't realize these ladies were suing him for "receiving massages"? I'll have to read the story again.
If the NFL is not the legal system, why are some posters advocating for no suspension because the GJ didn't indict?
Seems like trying to play both sides against the middle.
What do you think Kraft's punishment should have been?
Don't like Kraft at all. His charges were dropped, he had no pending lawsuits. His charges were solicitation. He is an apple.
Watson did not get any charges either. He has 26 pending lawsuits for Sexual Assault? He is an orange.
The link between Kraft and Watson? Whataboutism. Paying for sex and sexual assault...not the same thing, not the same ballpark.
I did not think that the Personal Conduct Policy was all that hard to read? Maybe it is for some of you? Also, the attorneys for the NFLPA and Watson's defense team see it far differently from you. Speaking of ballparks, someone is out in left field and it isn't me.
Who am I trying to bully. I don't even speak to 888 and Pit.
Yet you can't keep our names out of your mouth. You refuse to address us as men directly while saying things about us in general to everyone else. There's a name for that. Try to man up for as change.
I think it had far more to do with Watson and his lawyers getting absolutely destroyed in the court of public opinion. I don't think Watson or maybe his career could take another year+ of this limbo status.
There are certainly many factors to consider in terms of settling such lawsuits. One of which I would agree is the court of public opinion. I also think that what was uncovered concerning the Texans providing watson NDA's for massage therapists to sign was quite damning. So I would have to say that it was a combination of many factors. Including but not restricted to what it would actually cost to fight 24 civil cases, how long this would have dragged out, the possible increased punishment from the NFL and as things unfolded from a factual standpoint it was continually getting uglier.
I can't say I blame him for settling all of the lawsuits he could. I can't say I blame him for insisting his innocence throughout the entire process. I mean if you're fighting these lawsuits what else can you say? I do however think it leaves far more questions than answers.
So much for proving his innocence and saying he wanted a trial.
So much for the defense keeping their 'get out of free' evidence / defense case under wraps for the trial.
It's the smart thing to do for Watson.... But it flies in the face of everything he said publicly. Gosh I can't wait for his next presser when he talks about and mentions "Community" multiple times.
And for the many Watson defenders that said numbers do not matter. . . . all this means is that there are still sex assault allegations and he's being pursued in the civil courts. Remember that - it didn't matter if there was 1 or 26 allegations against him. Well - there is/are still allegations against him.
We have a board member who has courageously and honestly addressed his PTSD issues. Yet, not one of his so-called friends have had the decency to say to Lex that mental health attacks are improper. After all, Lex is on your "side" in this particular argument, so it's okay to use mental health issues as a weapon, right?
We also have several members who have openly admitted to battling depression. Lord only knows how many more silent victims there are on this board and how many of us who may have a loved one dealing w/mental health issues. Who cares if it helps win an argument on a football message board? Pathetic!!!
It's no freaking wonder so many people try and hide their mental health issues from others. To admit to it is to get laughed at and ridiculed.
We have a board member who has courageously and honestly addressed his PTSD issues. Yet, not one of his so-called friends have had the decency to say to Lex that mental health attacks are improper. After all, Lex is on your "side" in this particular argument, so it's okay to use mental health issues as a weapon, right?
We also have several members who have openly admitted to battling depression. Lord only knows how many more silent victims there are on this board and how many of us who may have a loved one dealing w/mental health issues. Who cares if it helps win an argument on a football message board? Pathetic!!!
It's no freaking wonder so many people try and hide their mental health issues from others. To admit to it is to get laughed at and ridiculed.
Vers, why do you not think about how you can be impacting the people that you harass and lie about on the boards? You act like an aggressor and then play the victim. Maybe try and apologizing to the posters you have lied about and see where that gets you?
Your reply has nothing at all to do w/my post. I'll be blunt. I don't like you. I want nothing to do w/you moving forward. Your mental health jokes are disgusting on many different levels.
Your reply has nothing at all to do w/my post. I'll be blunt. I don't like you. I want nothing to do w/you moving forward. Your mental health jokes are disgusting on many different levels.
Good then maybe stop lying and using my name and responding? You control your own destiny there.
And since we are sharing opinion so nicely, I find people that act like an asshat and then hide behind mental illness truly disgusting. You do not know what anyone else is dealing with, do not care how you treat them and then expect them to treat you with kid gloves like you are special.
So much for proving his innocence and saying he wanted a trial.
So much for the defense keeping their 'get out of free' evidence / defense case under wraps for the trial.
It's the smart thing to do for Watson.... But it flies in the face of everything he said publicly. Gosh I can't wait for his next presser when he talks about and mentions "Community" multiple times.
Perhaps. Or perhaps the full-court press Buzbee was doing out of court and how it was having a domino effect on his upcoming NFL season, the contract that may or may not have been structured to handle this forced Watson to just "take his medicine" so to speak. We may not know for sure, which I'm bummed about. For me, the worst thing would be to have that cloud hanging over my head (however it may shrink over time) of whether or not all this stuff was true. IMO, this decision came down to Watson making a business decision regarding re-starting his career where there were also short term ramifications (and I'm assuming massive amounts of pressure) to the Browns and the NFL.
And BTW, you could also say the same thing about the accusers taking the money. The argument cuts both ways when the one side has been beating the drum of respecting women and railing on the trauma they had to endure. Just as much as settling civil cases brought against you suggests guilt, so does putting a (confidential) price on the trauma you endured suggest you were in it for the money.
Originally Posted by mgh888
And for the many Watson defenders that said numbers do not matter. . . . all this means is that there are still sex assault allegations and he's being pursued in the civil courts. Remember that - it didn't matter if there was 1 or 26 allegations against him. Well - there is/are still allegations against him.
Lets see what the NFL does with this.
IMO, the NFL's punishment is going to make just as much sense as it would've before these cases were settled (not a whole lot), because at the end of the day we're still only talking about allegations. If the NFL is convinced he did everything he's being accused of, then they're punishment should remain the same regardless of whether he paid a bunch off. IMO, by rushing to judgement the NFL is showing that the only thing it cares about is CYA and checking a box. By comparison, people who keep referring to baseball's punishment vs Bauer seem to ignore the fact that they waited until his civil cases were concluded.
Regarding the still-pending civil cases against Watson... what then happens if these cases go nowhere? It's a hypothetical, so isn't worth the paper it's printed on... but people were also saying early on how difficult it is to prove guilt (even with the lower bar for civil cases).
So - just my personal opinion - there is a reasonable expectation that some of the 26 either entered into the situation with Watson "eyes open". They may have chose not to - or chose to perform what DW wanted. They may have then jumped on the band wagon. I expect some of the 26 were shocked / non consensual - and they were part of the group doing the allegations with grounds to complain ... but for whatever reasons - maybe there is no text messages or corroborating evidence to support them. Maybe they only talked to family or friends about what happened. . . . I think those 2 groups settled. I think there is probably a group of 4 individuals who have enough to substantiate their claims that a civil trial and bringing DW to "justice" and expose him for the predator they feel he is - I think that's the remaining individuals who are left.
100% speculation. But formed using what I would consider logic and plausibility.
Nice post. I will say that having the 4 unresolved cases is troubling and I am saying that as someone who wants Watson to play this season. I need time to think about the ones that were settled and those that were not and how that might influence things. I have had some thoughts, but I haven't even come close to drawing any conclusions.
Good then maybe stop lying and using my name and responding? You control your own destiny there.
That's not how any of this works. Now he will probably do what he does to everyone else " he doesn't like". He will throw your name around while refusing to address you directly. He claims he would stand up the the NFL directly if he were in watson's shoes. Yet what we see is that he will not even directly engage people he disagrees with on a message board. He instead takes cheap shots at them when addressing other posters. It's an all too familiar pattern.
Using your name? You are the one who resorted to mental health "jokes."
.
Speaking of mental health, people have suggested that due to the #s of women involved, it is implied DW is experiencing or has some sort of "addiction". If that is the case, doesn't the ADA come into play regarding punishment from the league. I know Josh was suspended multiple times, but it makes me wonder how much protection the ADA provides since I am constantly hearing PSAs on the radio that significant portion addictive behavior is hereditary.
I am not advocating this as an excuse for his behavior if guilty, but if addiction truly is a disability, how can you fire or suspend an employee, assuming they accept mental help.
Yes, this is a legitimate question and I realize that is not what Vers meant when he used the term.
I think for that to be a defense or an excuse or a factor to consider when deciding a punishment - Deshaun would have to raise his hand, say he has a problem. You can't claim a defense while all the time denying everything/anything.
I think for that to be a defense or an excuse or a factor to consider when deciding a punishment - Deshaun would have to raise his hand, say he has a problem. You can't claim a defense while all the time denying everything/anything.
I completely agree. I was just throwing it out there. If he were to say, "I am an addict & need professional help", would that mean he is entitled to help and not punishment. I ask this not just for DW, but many types of addictions in a wide variety of jobs. Or would the result be he would need to go on some sort of official disability such as a SS type, recover with treatment , then return to work.
So if Watson used power and influence to coerce any of these women into sexual activity ... or even if he tried to and failed ... I don't believe that would be a consideration. As it stands this is what the allegations are.
If Watson was found to have simply been looking for consensual activity - but the NFL was thinking of punishing him because of bad media attention and PR based on 66 therapists and paid for happy endings, then I believe it would be something to consider. And like alcohol or drug addiction / charges - the leniency of the punishment would require agreed to treatment. imo
i dunno how i feel about this. i understand that in cases like this, you gotta do what the lawyers say for the best outcome, but damn. morally, settling always seems like an admission of guilt. i get that some people do settle for the simple reason of not wasting time in court, but when it comes to sexual misconduct cases, it feels dirty.
Exactly how I feel about this. I understand the argument for settling, but CW himself and unprompted just a week ago said he wanted to CLEAR his name. I don't see for a second how settling now even comes close to clering his name. Just makes him look slimy at least or like a preditor at worst. But now I'm supposed to be giddy and run out to buy his merch. NOPE.
I think it had far more to do with Watson and his lawyers getting absolutely destroyed in the court of public opinion. I don't think Watson or maybe his career could take another year+ of this limbo status.
There are certainly many factors to consider in terms of settling such lawsuits. One of which I would agree is the court of public opinion. I also think that what was uncovered concerning the Texans providing watson NDA's for massage therapists to sign was quite damning. So I would have to say that it was a combination of many factors. Including but not restricted to what it would actually cost to fight 24 civil cases, how long this would have dragged out, the possible increased punishment from the NFL and as things unfolded from a factual standpoint it was continually getting uglier.
I can't say I blame him for settling all of the lawsuits he could. I can't say I blame him for insisting his innocence throughout the entire process. I mean if you're fighting these lawsuits what else can you say? I do however think it leaves far more questions than answers.
That revelation made me turn from open to him proving his innocence to doubting everything he says. Then he said a week ago clearing his name was all he wanted. Today he settles... So much for clearing his name IMHO.
Just curious about how you feel about him, Eve? Since this did nothing to prove that he was guilty or not. At this point, I'll root for the team, but I can't support him.
I extremely dislike him and wish we stuck with Baker. But we didnt. I'm like you. I support the team but not him. And at the end of the day I would just rather the drama be over with and move on. So I am glad he settled. I'm glad those women got retribution instead of going through trial and getting nothing.
i dunno how i feel about this. i understand that in cases like this, you gotta do what the lawyers say for the best outcome, but damn. morally, settling always seems like an admission of guilt. i get that some people do settle for the simple reason of not wasting time in court, but when it comes to sexual misconduct cases, it feels dirty.
Exactly how I feel about this. I understand the argument for settling, but CW himself and unprompted just a week ago said he wanted to CLEAR his name. I don't see for a second how settling now even comes close to clering his name. Just makes him look slimy at least or like a preditor at worst. But now I'm supposed to be giddy and run out to buy his merch. NOPE.
It doesn't matter how you guys feel. You have to look at it from Watsons standpoint.
We have to make a few assumptions here, but it will make the point more clear for you.
Let's say Watson did none of this. All of the civil charges were flim flam. To "clear" his name he would have had to go through 20 trials. How much do you think that would cost? It was far cheaper to cut bait and settle. Earlier I said "clear" his name. Do you actually think winning all of the potential cases would have "cleared" his name?
Go back 20 years, OJ was found no guilty in his trial for killing his wife...or ex wife, whatever she was at the time. Did being found not guilty "clear" his name? You still have people saying,,,being found not guilty isn't the same as being innocent. In other words, the sap sucker is guilty but got off.
I don't think Watson has any chance no matter what of clearing his name. Too many people already have their minds made up. That being the case, you take the easiest, quickest way out to put it behind you and move on. Moving on is the only real way to start taking the eraser to this situation....and even then a smudge will always remain.
Of all the owners, Snyder's case is the worst. The NFL let him get away w/his transgressions and threw out Grudin as sacrificial bait. However, now that Snyder is dealing w/claims that he hid revenue from the NFL, the league might take action. Sexual impropriety and harassment is one thing for the NFL and money is another.
And while Kraft and Jones have also been named by the NFLPA by the NFLPA in their defense of Watson, Snyder's case is the worst of them all. I can't see how the NFL could justify punishing Watson severely after they let Snyder off w/just a fine of $10 million.
To many of us forget, judge not- there is only one just judge. JMHO, guess for 20 of the countless ladies- some wanted the MONEY, was it for justice or just a money grab....we will never know. I'm disappointed he settled, but that is the way the rich take care of their problems. Money, many times, is the bottom line. I'll root whole-heartedly for DW because he's a fab athlete and QB, and because he does far more good than evil in the community. All of us human beings are imperfect.....GO Browns!!!
Good stuff here concerning the legal side... what has transpired, how Watson screwed himself (no pun intended), what we can expect going forward. Some interesting stuff around the 6:00 mark. Texas law permits an "offer of judgement" when a person just wants to cry "uncle" but a settlement number can't be agreed upon. If that offer is refused, and the court awards much less, the plaintiff is responsible for the defense's legal fees from the point of the offer forward. This makes the plaintiff put skin in the game if they are dragging things out with an unreasonable demand.
To many of us forget, judge not- there is only one just judge. JMHO, guess for 20 of the countless ladies- some wanted the MONEY, was it for justice or just a money grab....we will never know. I'm disappointed he settled, but that is the way the rich take care of their problems. Money, many times, is the bottom line. I'll root whole-heartedly for DW because he's a fab athlete and QB, and because he does far more good than evil in the community. All of us human beings are imperfect.....GO Browns!!!
You must be new to the board. Absolute Athiest here.
I skim read the six pages. Goodell said all the right things. It's up to the individual to interpret his sincerity.
Regarding how the Snyder cases influences the Watson case: The $10 million fine is something. Snyder stepping away from the day-to-day duties to the best of Goodell's knowledge is something. Yet, Snyder was never suspended.
The fact that Snyder and his franchise are being investigated by Congress on such a large scale for so many improprieties has to be considered to be a violation of the Personal Conduct Policy.
i dunno how i feel about this. i understand that in cases like this, you gotta do what the lawyers say for the best outcome, but damn. morally, settling always seems like an admission of guilt. i get that some people do settle for the simple reason of not wasting time in court, but when it comes to sexual misconduct cases, it feels dirty.
I do not think Watson necessarily varied from what he originally said though. When asked if he was going to settle his response reported was: "That's not my intent," Watson said in response. "My intent is to continue to clear my name as much as possible and that's what I'm focused on." Maybe he feels he has cleared his name as much as he can at this point?
I get what you're saying and understand that point of view. But I would have to ask you, how do you suspend someone from owning a team? I see stepping away from the day to day operations being about as close to a suspension as one can get from the standpoint of something a person owns. I don't know and maybe you have a better idea how something like that would work. But I'm just not sure how you can suspend someone from ownership?
To many of us forget, judge not- there is only one just judge. JMHO, guess for 20 of the countless ladies- some wanted the MONEY, was it for justice or just a money grab....we will never know. I'm disappointed he settled, but that is the way the rich take care of their problems. Money, many times, is the bottom line. I'll root whole-heartedly for DW because he's a fab athlete and QB, and because he does far more good than evil in the community. All of us human beings are imperfect.....GO Browns!!!
You must be new to the board. Absolute Athiest here.
I get what you're saying and understand that point of view. But I would have to ask you, how do you suspend someone from owning a team? I see stepping away from the day to day operations being about as close to a suspension as one can get from the standpoint of something a person owns. I don't know and maybe you have a better idea how something like that would work. But I'm just not sure how you can suspend someone from ownership?
I've thought the same thing, what the heck would that do. You can't prevent them from running their business. Lock them out of the facilities?
Seems like that would be window dressing more than anything else.
I get what you're saying and understand that point of view. But I would have to ask you, how do you suspend someone from owning a team? I see stepping away from the day to day operations being about as close to a suspension as one can get from the standpoint of something a person owns. I don't know and maybe you have a better idea how something like that would work. But I'm just not sure how you can suspend someone from ownership?
I would imagine that if they were serious about holding him accountable and decided that level of punishment was appropriate, they'd be able to get the details sorted out fairly easily. Hell, Haslam made changes to his Browns org (allegedly for the very same reason of blowback) while he was going through the fraud case(s).
I have no idea. I have found information that leads me to thinking that Goodell and the league play some role in and have some say over Snyder's return to the day to day operations.
Commissioner Roger Goodell claims Daniel Snyder still isn’t involved in day-to-day operations
When Commanders owner Daniel Snyder surrendered day-to-day control over the team, much was said about whether he did it voluntarily, and whether he’d be able to return without the express approval of Commissioner Roger Goodell.
Nearly nine months later, Goodell claims that Snyder remains disconnected from day-to-day franchise operations. Goodell also suggested that he’ll have a voice in whether and when Snyder returns.
“Dan Snyder has not been involved in day-to-day operations,” Goodell told reporters on Tuesday, via Charean Williams of PFT. “Don’t believe he’s been in the facility at all, and when we continue to have league matters, Tanya has represented the team as the CEO both on a day-to-day basis, but also here and that will continue for at least the foreseeable future, but Dan and I will talk about that at some point.”
The fact that Roger and Dan will “talk at some point” strongly suggests that Dan won’t return whenever he feels like it. In early July, Snyder’s lawyer, Jordan Siev, insisted that a report from the Washington Post indicating that Snyder needs Goodell’s approval to return is “false.”
While Goodell’s use of the term “day-to-day operations” could be subject to interpretation, Snyder has been present for games. He attended the unveiling of the team’s new name. During the 2021 season, coach Ron Rivera said he speaks with Snyder multiple times per week.
Snyder’s suspension (or whatever it is) has become complicated by a new investigation arising from allegations made directly against him by a former employee. Given that attorney Beth Wilkinson, who handled the prior investigation into the team’s long-term toxic workplace culture, would have recommended removing Snyder if the league had actually asked her to reduce her recommendations to writing, there’s a chance that Snyder’s grip on the team is currently tenuous, at best.
The league surely realizes that he’d fight zealously any effort to force him to sell. The best compromise could be for Snyder to transfer the team to his wife, Tanya, with the understanding that, eventually, his children would take over. Unless the apples fell in the next orchard over, however, that development probably wouldn’t be met with sighs of relief from fans of the team.
There are also several reports that some of the owners support Snyder being severely punished and possibly being forced to sell the team but that would be very difficult to do.
So other than making an owner step away from the day to day operations of the team, something he's already done, and hefty financial penalty, what punishment can you apply? The loss of draft picks maybe?
I'm just not clear on how "suspending an owner" would work beyond what has already happened. 10 mil in fines and handing over operational duties.
I certainly see how making a suspension public would put a better face on things, but I'm unsure of how much more they could do that hasn't already happened.
i dunno how i feel about this. i understand that in cases like this, you gotta do what the lawyers say for the best outcome, but damn. morally, settling always seems like an admission of guilt. i get that some people do settle for the simple reason of not wasting time in court, but when it comes to sexual misconduct cases, it feels dirty.
I do not think Watson necessarily varied from what he originally said though. When asked if he was going to settle his response reported was: "That's not my intent," Watson said in response. "My intent is to continue to clear my name as much as possible and that's what I'm focused on." Maybe he feels he has cleared his name as much as he can at this point?
Maybe. I said at the beginning he was a certified creep, but it feels worse than that.
I guess we’ll never truly know. But DW might have just got a huge benefit from this Snyder situation in Congress. If Godell did indeed know about that and didn’t do anything to Snyder, The NFLPA just got handed a slam dunk argument for why DW shouldn’t be suspended.
I never saw anything that directly connected the allegations to the therapy or that the therapy was to address the substance of the allegations. Nothing was mentioned about any sexual issues that were or are going to be addressed in his therapy. It was more of an open ended statement that seems to me to try and garner sympathy and use it as he is trying to address the problem without saying he's trying to address the problem. He prefaced it with things being tougher since he got to Cleveland with all the press over these multiple accusations. You may wish to look closer at what's not in his statement.
First off, $10m... while it sounds significant, is a drop in the bucket. Per a quick Google search, Dan Snyder has never brought in less than $100m/year from the Redskins, and that was back when he bought them. That number has doubled since then. The Snyder fine was nothing other than a very weak attempt to placate the people. I bring that up because the first step for them would be to actually take this stuff seriously. Until they complete step 1, we'll never get an answer to our question.
IMO, loss of draft picks hurts the team. They could impose a fine that's actually significant, and restrict it to Snyder, personally. If the owners are truly accountable to the conduct policy like they've stated, they could probably get as creative as they wanted. The road block is and will always be their reluctance to shine light onto the inner workings of the NFL.
The Snyder issue is getting very real. I watched highlights from today's Congressional hearing. It was intense. The Dems are all over Goodell, the NFL, and especially Snyder. They are going to subpoena Snyder next week.
Here is an article:
Quote
Daniel Snyder conducted 'shadow investigation' to bury findings of official probe into Washington Commanders organization, House committee says play 9:05 AM ET Tisha Thompson
Washington Commanders owner Daniel Snyder conducted a "shadow investigation" of allegations that he had fostered a toxic work culture within his organization and worked closely with the NFL to monitor and, ultimately, bury the findings from an official internal investigation, according to findings by a Democrat-led U.S. House committee released Wednesday.
The U.S. House Oversight Committee released a 29-page memo on its findings, supported by more than 600 pages of depositions, on the morning that NFL commissioner Roger Goodell was scheduled to testify.
Among other allegations described in the memo, the committee's eight-month investigation found evidence that Snyder used subpoena authority available to parties involved in overseas lawsuits to obtain correspondence from former president Bruce Allen and other former employees. The goal, according to the memo, was to build a case to the NFL that Allen was to blame for the team's toxic workplace environment, and that former employees were conspiring to disparage Snyder.
The committee says Snyder used a common-interest agreement between the Commanders and the NFL to "attempt to steer the direction" of the independent investigation into the team led by attorney Beth Wilkinson and to discredit the people accusing him, including those cited in reports published by The Washington Post, by providing the NFL and Wilkinson with "derogatory information about them."
Snyder repeatedly declined to appear at Wednesday's hearing, telling the committee he would be out of the country on business. Committee chair Carolyn Maloney (D-New York) announced she will subpoena Snyder for a deposition next week.
"The NFL is unwilling or unable to hold Mr. Snyder accountable," Maloney said. "That is why I am announcing now my intent to issue a subpoena for Mr. Snyder for a deposition next week. The committee will not be deterred in its investigation into the Washington Commanders."
When asked for comment Wednesday, the NFL provided a copy of Goodell's prepared remarks to the committee, in which he repeated his assertions that the "workplace in Washington was unprofessional and unacceptable in numerous respects" and that "the workplace at the Commanders today bears no resemblance to the workplace that has been described to this committee."
"It is clear the outcome of the House Oversight Committee's investigation into the Washington Commanders was predetermined from the beginning," a spokesperson for Snyder said in a statement. "The committee's decision to release a 'report' and introduce legislation prior to the hearing is proof-positive this was always going to be little more than a politically-charged show trial, not about uncovering the truth. Hopefully, the committee will utilize its resources going forward for more pressing national matters, instead of an issue a football team addressed years ago."
As part of the NFL's record-setting $10 million fine levied by the league in July 2021 after its internal investigation of the Commanders, the team is required to submit regular audit reports by an independent firm. The most recent audit from January 2022, conducted by Vestry Laight and reviewed by ESPN, stated the team has instituted new procedures for its human resources department to investigate harassment claims, developed a new disciplinary plan for documenting and adjudicating misconduct, and is conducting regular "culture surveys" of employees. The team is also implementing regular trainings on harassment and diversity and inclusion and is working to diversify its staff, according to the report.
In a letter to Commanders employees Wednesday, Snyder and wife Tanya, who co-owns the team, reiterated Vestry Laight's findings and said "comments in the media have portrayed our team in a harsh and negative manner that does not reflect who we are as an organization today."
"There is simply no committee more knowledgeable on the Washington Commanders than our own team members," they wrote.
The Republican ranking member of the committee, James Comer (R-Kentucky), who has been outspoken about how Congress shouldn't be involved in investigating the Commanders, said later Wednesday in a statement that the plan to subpoena Snyder is "a misuse of congressional oversight authority and a dereliction of duty."
Goodell was asked about Snyder's alleged shadow investigation.
"Any action that would discourage people from coming forward would be inappropriate," the commissioner said.
Attorneys Lisa Banks and Debra Katz, who represent more than 40 former team employees, again called on Goodell to release a report from the Wilkinson probe, calling it "stunning and disheartening" to hear him say Snyder has been held accountable.
"Today, the committee released a damning report demonstrating that Snyder and his lawyers also surveilled and investigated complainants, their lawyers, witnesses and journalists, which Goodell knew about and did nothing to address," Banks and Katz said in a statement.
According to the memo authored by Maloney, Snyder and his lawyers compiled a "100-slide dossier" in November 2020 that "appears to be based on private text messages, emails, phone logs and call transcripts, and social media posts from nearly 50 individuals."
Snyder's attorneys presented the 100 slides, which also included information about Washington Post journalists, to the NFL and Wilkinson's team, according to the memo, with the goal of "crafting an exculpatory narrative to present to the NFL showing that he was not responsible for the Commanders' toxic work environment but instead was the victim of a coordinated smear campaign."
In the memo, committee investigators detail how Snyder's lawyer obtained some of the private information used in the dossier. In 2020, Snyder filed a defamation lawsuit against Media Entertainment Arts Worldwide, which is based in India. As part of that lawsuit, Snyder used "a powerful litigation tool available to parties to a foreign proceeding to compel phone records, emails, and other documents from former employees and other individuals," according to the memo.
"A close examination of Mr. Snyder's [petitions] suggests that his focus was not on discovering the sources of the MEAWW articles but on those who were behind the Washington Post exposés," the memo states.
Committee investigators list multiple former employees who received subpoenas, as well as Jessica McCloughan, the wife of former Commanders general manager Scot McCloughan. Committee investigators highlight how a federal judge ruled the McCloughan document requests went "far beyond anything related to the defamatory MEAWW articles."
The judge labeled the subpoena attempt "improper, unnecessarily invasive" and said it "may be less of a bona fide effort to obtain evidence supportive of the claims in the Indian Action, than they are an effort to burden and harass individuals formerly associated with the Washington Football Team who may have acted as sources for The Washington Post."
Committee investigators state that Snyder also "targeted" Allen with a petition filed in Arizona, where Snyder's lawyers told the court that the documents would reveal Allen as a source for reports made by The Washington Post. Investigators note that Snyder's attorneys collected 400,000 emails from Allen's inactive Commanders email account and provided them to the NFL and Wilkinson.
NFL representatives told committee staff that Snyder's attorneys "identified the specific inappropriate Bruce Allen emails in attempting to demonstrate that Bruce Allen had created a toxic environment at the Washington Commanders," prompting a "targeted review" of Allen's emails by the NFL, which in turn led to the examination of "troubling exchanges between Mr. Allen, former Raiders Coach Jon Gruden, and [NFL lawyer] Jeff Pash," according to the memo. Those emails led to Gruden's firing after they were leaked to the media last year.
The memo states that the NFL received at least 16 briefings from Wilkinson's law firm on her findings between August 2020 and June 2021, including at least four written briefings, and that Goodell was "personally briefed" at least twice. Goodell said in his prepared remarks that "we did not receive a written report of Ms. Wilkinson's findings."
The memo also details allegations from David Pauken, the Commanders' chief operating officer from 2001 to 2006, who told the committee that Snyder knew about sexual harassment against female employees but declined to take action, personally made the decision to fire female employees who engaged in consensual relationships with male employees, and sexualized and disparaged cheerleaders.
According to the committee memo, "Pauken testified that Mr. Snyder was responsible for the overly sexual nature of the cheerleading program and mocked Mr. Pauken for opposing his vision."
In his testimony to Congress, Pauken stated he was uncomfortable with "the way the NFL sexualizes cheerleaders." Pauken testified that Snyder, along with another team executive, pushed for the team to offer sponsors and suite holder access to cheerleader photo shoots as "an experience that could be sold."
"I never allowed it," Pauken testified.
Pauken also described how Snyder repeatedly questioned Pauken's sexuality by asking Pauken whether he "liked girls." In his deposition, Pauken explained, "That anybody who likes girls likes cheerleaders, and if you don't, if you're uncomfortable with the cheerleaders, maybe you don't like girls. That was my understanding of where he was going with that."
Pauken also described how Snyder "objectified Commanders cheerleaders and made crass comments about their physical appearance," according to the committee memo. When summoned to Snyder's box before a game, Pauken testified how Snyder remarked to a friend, "Do you think Dave is gay?" To which the friend responded, "Yeah, he must be gay."
According to Pauken's deposition, Snyder "would say, yeah, he has to be gay. As ugly as these cheerleaders are. Pauken, are you gay? You must be gay. How could you have a cheerleading squad that looks like this?"
The committee found evidence that Snyder ordered the firing of two cheerleaders for "engaging in romantic relationships" with former tight end Chris Cooley, according to the memo. Pauken testified that when he learned about the relationships, he shared them with Snyder, who made the decision to fire both cheerleaders.
"The female employees were fired, the male employee was -- there were no repercussions other than he was restricted from additional sex with the cheerleaders," according to Pauken's deposition.
The committee memo states, "Snyder's decision was part of a pattern of firing female employees who engaged in consensual sexual relationships with male members of the team's football operations in order to 'minimize distractions, temptations for players.'"
In his testimony, Pauken also told committee investigators that when Snyder learned a member of the team's coaching staff had groped a public relations employee, Snyder refused to take action against the coach and instead directed the employee who had been groped to "stay away from the coach."
Pauken told the committee: "I knew the importance of things that were important to [Snyder]. This was a new coach and we weren't going to disrupt that new coach. And so we were going to make the problem go away as best we could."
Another former chief operating officer, Brian Lafemina, told committee investigators during his deposition that in 2018, a subordinate had reported feeling uncomfortable interacting with Larry Michael, the former "Voice of the Washington Commanders," after Michael had kissed her on the forehead, touched her on the cheeks and made comments about her appearance.
Lafemina testified that when he told Snyder, he replied that "Larry was a sweetheart and that Larry wouldn't hurt anybody."
Committee staff stated in their memo that Michael was accused of sexual misconduct by multiple employees spanning several years and, according to materials presented by the NFL to the committee, was caught on video making lewd remarks about a Commanders intern.
Michael resigned shortly after The Washington Post first reported on allegations against him in 2020.
The committee memo also shared details from the deposition of Jason Friedman, a former employee who accused the team of financial improprieties during his testimony and sent a letter to Congress stating he witnessed Snyder trying to push another former employee, Tiffani Johnston, into a waiting limo after Snyder placed his hand on her thigh under the table of a work dinner about 13 years ago.
Friedman told congressional investigators that the team's culture "glorified drinking and womanizing" and that Snyder personally "pressured employees to drink excessively," according to the memo.
"People were afraid to lose their jobs because they had seen so many others lose their jobs," Friedman testified.
Goodell did not make Snyder step away from day-to-day operations. Snyder volunteered to do so. However, there is no real proof that Snyder has really stepped away.
I think this attention on Snyder is pretty good news for Watson.
I also think that Snyder is in big trouble. The other owners could stomach his terrible workplace and sexual misconduct, but they won't tolerate the money angle.
Perhaps full disclosure on how the NFL handles these cases is not nearly as far-fetched as it was yesterday?
This is all good news for those who want Watson to play. Bad news for those who don't want him to play.
However, the public perception is still very hostile towards Watson. Thus, it's a tough call moving forward. The more info that comes out about how the NFL handles these cases in regards to their Personal Conduct policy, the better it is for Watson. I am just not sure if it will be enough. It is getting extremely interesting, though.
We should start a thread for the Snyder thing so it doesn't distract from the DW narrative. I am just saying that they are not connected in any way except as a comparison for when justice is finally doled out to Watson.
LOL.........telling people what to post and where? Sounds familiar. Btw..........they are connected and if you were able to read w/out bias, you would understand that. The NFLPA is defending Watson and their public strategy is to compare the discrepancies between how players [including Watson] are treated vs owners when the Personal Conduct Policy is violated. Just because it doesn't fit your one-sided agenda of we have to say "Watson is guilty and should be suspended for a long time" doesn't make it connected.
I think that's exactly how this thread got started, and I only made a suggestion, I didn't whine. That single finger you just pointed at me left three pointing back at you, Vers. Have a nice night.
I get the slim connection which has mostly been pushed by one poster into the conversation. And I don't care one way or the other about a suspension, I care if he is a predator or not. If he's a predator I hope he gets banned. If he stayed within the lines of consent and didn't force these women into unwanted sexual activity, I'm ok with him having a sex addiction as long as he's getting the right kind of help and it doesn't happen here. But you go ahead and decide what I'm thinking, that's who you are.
BTW, I don't think there is a chance in hell he is innocent and stayed within the lines of consent at this point, so I'd like him gone.
You can blame me all you want, but the NFLPA has pursued the same course of action. I understand how fascists operate, always wanting to oppress opposing opinions, but this is America and I won't be swayed by fascist opinions on how to post.
You can blame me all you want, but the NFLPA has pursued the same course of action. I understand how fascists operate, always wanting to oppress opposing opinions, but this is America and I won't be swayed by fascist opinions on how to post.
I watch you operate every day. So I understand it well.
Ditto, all you typed. Great points. DW can't win, he's been judged and most/ not all people will change their minds. Saving money by paying off massage workers makes common sense. DW getting therapy isn't bad, jmho, it's a private matter- how many males get therapy for porn or drug addictions- would that therapy be judged bad. OCD- to you specifically- off subject- Shroud of Turin- how does a photograph have 3D- only photo in existence that does. Won't change your mind, but being an intelligent atheist explain it to yourself.
This is all good news for those who want Watson to play. Bad news for those who don't want him to play.
If only that's what this was all about. Try framing it more accurately. Those who think watson is guilty and those who do not. The importance of the game itself and whether he plays or not pales in comparison to the issues being discussed no matter how hard you try to frame it otherwise.
I wish the entire conversation was available, but this is all I could find of it. Kimberly Martin talked about Snyder and some of his representatives investigated all sorts of people--including reporters and the Washington employees--to dig up dirt on them and then used intimidation to silence them. Clearly, the NFLPA and Watson's defense team can use some of this information about how the other owners have treated the Snyder situation in order to help in Watson's defense.
I wish the entire conversation was available, but this is all I could find of it. Kimberly Martin talked about Snyder and some of his representatives investigated all sorts of people--including reporters and the Washington employees--to dig up dirt on them and then used intimidation to silence them. Clearly, the NFLPA and Watson's defense team can use some of this information about how the other owners have treated the Snyder situation in order to help in Watson's defense.
I posted this on the Will Watson Play This Year thread, but there is "legal" information in this video. It's a shame that this topic isn't contained to this forum, just like all of the prior legal cases were. Anyway...not sure how some continue to deny that the owner's legal problems will not be used as a tool by the NFLPA and Watson's defense.
I wish the entire conversation was available, but this is all I could find of it. Kimberly Martin talked about Snyder and some of his representatives investigated all sorts of people--including reporters and the Washington employees--to dig up dirt on them and then used intimidation to silence them. Clearly, the NFLPA and Watson's defense team can use some of this information about how the other owners have treated the Snyder situation in order to help in Watson's defense.
Listen to yourself…
As it stands right now, it doesn't look like the owners are going to remove Snyder (JMO). Goodell seemingly made the full stop saying he can't do anything about Snyder, which he obviously can- he can initiate a removal. I don't believe Goodell said/did that for Richardson. It would take 22 owners to vote him out, if I am not mistaken, which seems like quite a bit of back-room negotiating needed prior to a vote. If the NFL wasn't able to get a 2/3 commitment from the owners and went to a failing vote, that would be another PR nightmare. I bet these owners are scared Snyder might be willing to drop some damaging knowledge on them. You know there are a ton of skeletons in those owner's closets that they all know about.
As Snyder goes through the political pageantry again as we speak, the NFLPA is certainly watching very closely to what is going on. I still think Watson will be suspended but I don't think it will be as dramatic as some suspect or even wish.
In the end, I don't think the powers that be want to risk fully blowing the top off of the cash cow that is the NFL. Snyder being investigated and what could happen afterwards might be a disaster for the league. I think the NFL is probably thinking to themselves a modest suspension on a situation that will be inevitably fade away because of either (1) time or (2) another incident the league will need to address is worth not putting a full court press on.
We'll see soon. Since the schedule came out, I always felt after the Monday night game against the Bengals would be the right time to bring him back....so Week 9 against the Dolphins.
OCD- to you specifically- off subject- Shroud of Turin- how does a photograph have 3D- only photo in existence that does. Won't change your mind, but being an intelligent atheist explain it to yourself.
A long time ago, maybe in the late 2000s but I can't recall exactly when, I looked at the shroud and controversy over it being faked. In conclusion, there were just too many unanswered questions to consider it proof of anything. There is a strong debate about the actual existence of Jesus as a real person, rather the shroud was a product of the church during the time they raised funds by selling religious artifacts, or if it is authentic is it Jesus or some random person. Then when overlayed upon a virtual mannequin the features did not really line up as expected. It was even speculated that it was painted in blood. So no, it doesn't change my mind any more than what I just said will deter or change your faith. Trust me, as an open atheist, I've had more convos like that than you could count. Nothing against you, but most Christians tend to challenge atheist beliefs, because my beliefs are somehow inferior, evil, or inconceivable because they fly in the face of their beliefs. It's a common experience.
I didn't know anyone was trying to say the NFLPA wouldn't try to use anything. Personally, I think a good defense uses anything they can. But that doesn't mean I don't think the comparison is irrelevant because I do. I also think they should be adjudicated as individual cases on the merits of the case. If there is some unfairness in the application of discipline, then that is an appeal issue, not a factor used to negotiate discipline going in, IMHO.
“I bet these owners are scared Snyder might be willing to drop some damaging knowledge on them. You know there are a ton of skeletons in those owner's closets that they all know about.”
Not to sound paranoid, but it would not surprise me. And not just the owners, but the LEAGUE itself.
One example: Kaepernic was blacklisted. Period. It took George Floyd and the tidal wave of public sentiment in the aftermath, for Goodell to say ‘oops, yeah we weren’t paying attention.”
[quote] I've had more convos like that than you could count. Nothing against you, but most Christians tend to challenge atheist beliefs, because my beliefs are somehow inferior, evil, or inconceivable because they fly in the face of their beliefs. It's a common experience./[quote]
Are you glad God gave you free will the believe what you want
I wish the entire conversation was available, but this is all I could find of it. Kimberly Martin talked about Snyder and some of his representatives investigated all sorts of people--including reporters and the Washington employees--to dig up dirt on them and then used intimidation to silence them. Clearly, the NFLPA and Watson's defense team can use some of this information about how the other owners have treated the Snyder situation in order to help in Watson's defense.
Listen to yourself…
As it stands right now, it doesn't look like the owners are going to remove Snyder (JMO). Goodell seemingly made the full stop saying he can't do anything about Snyder, which he obviously can- he can initiate a removal. I don't believe Goodell said/did that for Richardson. It would take 22 owners to vote him out, if I am not mistaken, which seems like quite a bit of back-room negotiating needed prior to a vote. If the NFL wasn't able to get a 2/3 commitment from the owners and went to a failing vote, that would be another PR nightmare. I bet these owners are scared Snyder might be willing to drop some damaging knowledge on them. You know there are a ton of skeletons in those owner's closets that they all know about.
As Snyder goes through the political pageantry again as we speak, the NFLPA is certainly watching very closely to what is going on. I still think Watson will be suspended but I don't think it will be as dramatic as some suspect or even wish.
In the end, I don't think the powers that be want to risk fully blowing the top off of the cash cow that is the NFL. Snyder being investigated and what could happen afterwards might be a disaster for the league. I think the NFL is probably thinking to themselves a modest suspension on a situation that will be inevitably fade away because of either (1) time or (2) another incident the league will need to address is worth not putting a full court press on.
We'll see soon. Since the schedule came out, I always felt after the Monday night game against the Bengals would be the right time to bring him back....so Week 9 against the Dolphins.
Solid take. I don't know about the number of games, but your points are all solid.
What kind of punishments could they give owners? How about loss of draft picks, or even for bigger issues, go the way of the NCAA and elimination from playoffs for X number of years.
Those things would hurt worse than any monetary fine, as it would affect their player and coach acquisition.
I just do not see a path to where DW would lose a season.
When a season is taken off the table. The next look is half a season.
Then a negotiated settlement between all parties. 6 to 8 games.
All serious media including someone inside Team Watson camp is mentioning a one year suspension to start with. Can’t see the NFL backing down without losing face. I expect at least one year and maybe something more like accept counseling from a professional therapist or similar.
What kind of punishments could they give owners? How about loss of draft picks, or even for bigger issues, go the way of the NCAA and elimination from playoffs for X number of years.
Those things would hurt worse than any monetary fine, as it would affect their player and coach acquisition.
I just do not see a path to where DW would lose a season.
When a season is taken off the table. The next look is half a season.
Then a negotiated settlement between all parties. 6 to 8 games.
All serious media including someone inside Team Watson camp is mentioning a one year suspension to start with. Can’t see the NFL backing down without losing face. I expect at least one year and maybe something more like accept counseling from a professional therapist or similar.
My guess is the NFL wants it known they pushed for a year or more so when the arbiter recommends 8 games the league can say they tried to make an example of him and people should be pissed at Sue Robinson and not the NFL.
What kind of punishments could they give owners? How about loss of draft picks, or even for bigger issues, go the way of the NCAA and elimination from playoffs for X number of years.
Those things would hurt worse than any monetary fine, as it would affect their player and coach acquisition.
The draft picks make sense. When you get to the point you eliminate teams from the playoffs, you are hurting the players as much as the owner and the players aren't the people you are trying to punish IMO
I mean look at the outrage you are seeing from a few on this board for punishing watson. Can you imagine the outrage of punishing an entire teams players for the actions of their owner?
Or maybe since it's not the Browns QB or a Browns player they wouldn't give a damn and that's really why it's bothering them so much.
What kind of punishments could they give owners? How about loss of draft picks, or even for bigger issues, go the way of the NCAA and elimination from playoffs for X number of years.
Those things would hurt worse than any monetary fine, as it would affect their player and coach acquisition.
I'm not sure. I do think this is more of a threat by the NFLPA to protect Watson's rights. Their words, not mine. Exposing the underbelly of the league probably doesn't do either side much good. I think a big story is whether or not the NFL should force Snyder out? I believe Memphis is right that it would take a vote where 2/3 of the owners would have to vote to expel him. The problem of doing that is already being discussed, such as the one video I posted a day or so ago, where people are saying that Snyder likely has dirt on other NFL owners and will expose them should be ousted. The fact that Congress is already involved makes the situation that much more troubling for the NFL. The timing is actually right for those defending Watson and the NFLPA has already laid out their threats publicly.
Lex has a good point that the NFL could blame the investigators and also the independent judge for the lack of a lengthy suspension. Goodall can override the decision, but perhaps he won't if he knows that the image of the league will be severely damaged if the NFLPA follows through on exposing the indiscretions of the owners and the lack of punishment handed out by the NFL in those cases.
NFL betting: It's not too late to cash in on a potential Deshaun Watson suspension
We have officially reached the slowest part of the NFL calendar. Minicamps and OTAs are done, but we're still about a month away from training camps opening up. While we don't expect much news from the NFL until training camp begins, there is a belief that we're nearing a decision on a potential suspension for Browns' quarterback Deshaun Watson.
Watson has not played since 2020, due to a combination of his dissatisfaction with the Houston Texans and what is now 26 allegations of sexual misconduct. The Browns decided that Watson's talent was worth the risk and subsequent PR nightmare, and traded for him in March. Just a few days ago, Watson settled 20 of his cases, but he's not out of the woods. It's not believed that settling his cases will have any impact on a potential suspension. Over the weekend, it was reported by the Washington Post that the NFL is seeking a full-season suspension for Watson.
While the Watson situation is much bigger than football and betting, there's no denying the impact any news will have on the field and with the betting market. Since the Browns acquired Watson, they've already dropped from 18-to-1 to win the Super Bowl to 25-to-1. They were once favorites to win the AFC North, but now they have the third best odds in the division. While the market has certainly adjusted due to the likely looming suspension, it's not too late to get in on some action. Here's two potentially lucrative ways to fade the Browns before the suspension news drops. AFC North - Dual Forecast
While the AFC North may not be as hyped as the AFC West or the NFC West, it's still one of the very best divisions in football with four teams that expect to compete. The Cincinnati Bengals made it to the Super Bowl last season. The Baltimore Ravens were 8-3 at one point before their injuries became too much to overcome. Mike Tomlin hasn't had a losing record with the Steelers since taking over in 2007.
Even if Deshaun Watson was absolved and played all 17 games, you'd be able to make a very good case that the Ravens and Bengals are the two best teams in this division. If Jacoby Brissett starts a lot of games for the Browns this season, it's hard to envision a world where they can compete with two very good teams. He averaged 5.7 yards per attempt this past season with Miami in five starts. There is no downfield threat at all with Brissett, which will allow teams to stack the box and hone in on the Browns' run game.
Currently at BetMGM, you can bet that the Ravens and Bengals will occupy the top two seeds in the AFC North. This is the chalkiest bet in the market, but it still pays out at +175 which is more than good enough. Browns to finish last in division
Last season, the Cleveland Browns finished the season with an 8-9 record, which tied them with Baltimore for the worst record in the AFC North. This season, the Steelers are prohibitive -190 favorites to finish the season in the basement of the division. The Browns are +400 to finish in last place.
Baker Mayfield played through injury from Week 2 on in 2021, which severely impacted his play and the Browns' ability to win. There were questions about whether Mayfield is a franchise quarterback to begin the season anyway, which is the main reason why the Browns went out and acquired Watson. However, even while playing with a torn labrum and other injuries, Mayfield is a better quarterback than Jacoby Brissett. So with the Watson suspension looming, it appears the Browns will play a sizable part of their season with Brissett under center. This would mean that rather than improving their biggest question mark, they downgraded.
The Steelers are the favorites to finish in last place, but they're coming off a nine-win season and a playoff berth. The combination of Mitch Trubisky and Kenny Pickett can't be worse than the version of Ben Roethlisberger we saw last season. As mentioned above, Mike Tomlin's teams are always in the mix. We saw him coach a team with Duck Hodges to an 8-8 record a few years ago. If you're giving me Jacoby Brissett and Kevin Stefanski at +400 to finish below Mike Tomlin, I'm taking it all day long.
The Ravens finished last in the division in 2021, but it's really hard to envision that repeating itself. In fact, the Ravens are the current betting favorites to win the division at +165. They were 8-3 last season before injuries to Lamar Jackson and a boatload of other important players submarined their season. As long as Baltimore doesn't have another catastrophic season on the injury front, they'll avoid the basement.
A lot of people around the NFL expect the Bengals to take a step backwards in 2022, and that's not a terrible take. They did win the AFC last year; it'd be easy to take a step back from that. However, with Joe Burrow and Ja'Marr Chase another year older, I certainly don't expect them to fall into the basement of the division.
If we're banking on a lengthy suspension for Watson and a lot of Jacoby Brissett under center for the Browns this season, then +400 odds to finish last in the division seems like a good bet to make.
The 18-1 odds were set right when Watson signed w/the Browns. I remember ESPN showing a graphic of how no NFL team had as big of a positive jump than the Browns. I think the Browns were 40 to 1 before Watson signed. Not positive about that number, but I think it's right. I'll see if I can find it.
Deshaun Watson suspension decision: NFLPA concerned NFL will discipline Browns QB indefinitely, per report
Some believe the league will try to suspend Watson for the entire 2022 season, if not longer
Deshaun Watson has settled 20 of 24 civil lawsuits accusing him of sexual misconduct, but the Browns quarterback is not out of the woods when it comes to NFL discipline. While the former Texans star has publicly sworn innocence and avoided criminal charges for an alleged pattern of abuse during private massage therapy sessions, the NFL Players Association is concerned the NFL will suspend Watson for the entire 2022 season, if not indefinitely, according to Pro Football Network.
This echoes reporting from The Washington Post, which said last week that Watson's camp expects the NFL to argue he "deserves to be suspended for at least one full season," and that league executives will likely seek a "significant" penalty for the QB. The Browns have been awaiting a "lengthy suspension" for their new starter, per Aaron Wilson, and are expected to proceed with new backup Jacoby Brissett as their emergency No. 1 in the event Watson is suspended for most, or all, of 2022.
The NFLPA, meanwhile, previously championed Watson's record contract with the Browns, who signed the QB to a five-year, fully guaranteed $230 million contract, despite him still facing almost two dozen lawsuits at the time. NFLPA president JC Tretter, a former Brown, has celebrated Watson's earnings as a potential "turning point" for other guaranteed contracts around the league. Watson's own agents negotiated the contract to protect the QB from any substantial financial losses in the event of a lengthy 2022 suspension, suggesting the former Pro Bowler always anticipated NFL discipline for his alleged off-field transgressions.
As for the possibility of the Browns reconciling with former No. 1 overall draft pick Baker Mayfield -- who remains on the roster -- as a fill-in for Watson, that's considered almost impossible in Cleveland, per Wilson. The Browns are still seeking to offload Mayfield's $18.8 million guaranteed salary via trade, aiming to deal the QB by the start of training camp, and if not then, by the start of the regular season. The Seahawks, who have a high level of interest in Mayfield, per CBS Sports NFL insider Josina Anderson, are considered a more likely landing spot for the veteran than the Panthers, who had prior talks with the Browns.
The mention of "indefinite" certainly ratchets things up a bit. I wonder if this isn't the league dangling that out there to get the NFLPA and Watson's camp to think a year maybe isn't so bad. While I suppose it was always possible, that's more than I thought the league would ever consider given their penchant for slaps on the wrist with these things.
Cleveland was 35-1 to win the Super Bowl at DraftKings earlier this week. The Watson trade immediately vaulted the Browns into the realm of contenders, and they are tied with Denver as the third-favorite to win the Super Bowl out of the AFC with 14-1 odds. They have surpassed Baltimore and Cincinnati as the favorites in the AFC North too.
This link will show you where the odds were set when he was signed and how they changed since then.
Cleveland’s Season Win Total Off the Board at Most Sportsbooks
Same link.
Sportsbooks Adjust Browns’ Season Opener
Same link.
There's no doubt that the looming suspension has impacted the odds of the Cleveland Browns to win the opener, the division and their odds to make and or win the SB in the sports betting world.
Deshaun Watson suspension decision: NFLPA concerned NFL will discipline Browns QB indefinitely, per report
Some believe the league will try to suspend Watson for the entire 2022 season, if not longer
Deshaun Watson has settled 20 of 24 civil lawsuits accusing him of sexual misconduct, but the Browns quarterback is not out of the woods when it comes to NFL discipline. While the former Texans star has publicly sworn innocence and avoided criminal charges for an alleged pattern of abuse during private massage therapy sessions, the NFL Players Association is concerned the NFL will suspend Watson for the entire 2022 season, if not indefinitely, according to Pro Football Network.
This echoes reporting from The Washington Post, which said last week that Watson's camp expects the NFL to argue he "deserves to be suspended for at least one full season," and that league executives will likely seek a "significant" penalty for the QB. The Browns have been awaiting a "lengthy suspension" for their new starter, per Aaron Wilson, and are expected to proceed with new backup Jacoby Brissett as their emergency No. 1 in the event Watson is suspended for most, or all, of 2022.
The NFLPA, meanwhile, previously championed Watson's record contract with the Browns, who signed the QB to a five-year, fully guaranteed $230 million contract, despite him still facing almost two dozen lawsuits at the time. NFLPA president JC Tretter, a former Brown, has celebrated Watson's earnings as a potential "turning point" for other guaranteed contracts around the league. Watson's own agents negotiated the contract to protect the QB from any substantial financial losses in the event of a lengthy 2022 suspension, suggesting the former Pro Bowler always anticipated NFL discipline for his alleged off-field transgressions.
As for the possibility of the Browns reconciling with former No. 1 overall draft pick Baker Mayfield -- who remains on the roster -- as a fill-in for Watson, that's considered almost impossible in Cleveland, per Wilson. The Browns are still seeking to offload Mayfield's $18.8 million guaranteed salary via trade, aiming to deal the QB by the start of training camp, and if not then, by the start of the regular season. The Seahawks, who have a high level of interest in Mayfield, per CBS Sports NFL insider Josina Anderson, are considered a more likely landing spot for the veteran than the Panthers, who had prior talks with the Browns.
Is that the correct link? I clicked on it and it was an article about Best Bargain NFL players.
Also, I can't find quotes to support this claim at all: "NFLPA concerned NFL will discipline Browns QB indefinitely." The NFLPA said they were concerned? I doubt the validity of this claim.
True, but there is also no doubt that the odds of the Browns of winning the Super Bowl are still better now than before they signed him. Might as well look at the entire picture, right?
What kind of punishments could they give owners? How about loss of draft picks, or even for bigger issues, go the way of the NCAA and elimination from playoffs for X number of years.
Those things would hurt worse than any monetary fine, as it would affect their player and coach acquisition.
In a way, I disagree. The league pulling draft choices as an example IMO is a penalty on the fan base as much or more than anyone else. I am trying to think of ways to assess penalty without impacting the fans.
The entire picture? First your claim was that the odds hadn't changed. So I guess since that fell through.......
I did not say that. Man, why must you resort to telling lies when the facts are distributed?
Here is what I said:
Quote
The 18-1 odds were set right when Watson signed w/the Browns. I remember ESPN showing a graphic of how no NFL team had as big of a positive jump than the Browns. I think the Browns were 40 to 1 before Watson signed. Not positive about that number, but I think it's right. I'll see if I can find it.
How in the hell do you get "First your claim was that the odds hadn't changed." out of what I said? Freaking lame.
Also, I can not find one quote from the NFLPA that supports this part of the headline in that particular article: "NFLPA concerned NFL will discipline Browns QB indefinitely."
peen, I am not saying draft picks should be taken away, but college fans are penalized when their team has sanctions levied against them.
But again, I think the NFLPA is using the threat of exposing the underbelly of the NFL as a negotiating tool rather than actually harming the NFL brand. They are just trying to get the NFL to play more fair while they protect Watson's rights.
So you then claimed we should look at the big picture after first trying to show that the odds of winning the SB shot up after watson was signed? And that wasn't you trying to indicate something? You weren't trying to counter my assertion that the odds of winning the SB had gone down since the watson suspension now seemed eminent and long term?
It seems as if they are trying to undermine the reality of how sexual allegations on a grand scale have been dealt with too lightly in the past and that the NFL needs to step up in such cases. That if they continue to use the past to deal with the present, the NFL will never be able to seriously address the egregiousness of this degradation and abuse of women in a serious and just way. You know the old "we were wrong in the past and need to correct it" can never happen according the NFLPA.
Your words- egregiousness of this degradation and abuse of women in a serious and just way- they are masseuses, who should be afraid of NO human body part. DW hasn't been charged with ANY CRIMINAL charges- I don't get the folks who judge him- he doesn't think about the body or sex like you do......the NFL should just stone him to death, then some folks would be happy. Long ago we had a President who didn't have sex and didn't commit perjury- and he walked.....DW should continue whatever counselling he's getting, pay the other money leaches and get on with football. Go Browns!!!
Yeah, that makes it all better. That president you talked about didn't sign an agreement to a personal conduct policy. And he was a scum bag too. So because someone got away with it means it's fine if others aren't held accountable for their actions either. Somehow in your mind that seems to make sense. You are not alone.
IMO, if Mike Vick can come back into the league and play after being part of a ring that had living creatures fight to the death for money, if Josh Gordon can come back and play after multiple substance abuse issues, then DW should be allowed back to play after an 8 game suspension. Also if it is a year suspended, I wonder what kind of rust DW will have after 2 years of not playing? at least he'll be healed from any nagging issues.
Also if it is a year suspended, I wonder what kind of rust DW will have after 2 years of not playing? at least he'll be healed from any nagging issues.
Your words- egregiousness of this degradation and abuse of women in a serious and just way- they are masseuses, who should be afraid of NO human body part. DW hasn't been charged with ANY CRIMINAL charges- I don't get the folks who judge him- he doesn't think about the body or sex like you do......the NFL should just stone him to death, then some folks would be happy. Long ago we had a President who didn't have sex and didn't commit perjury- and he walked.....DW should continue whatever counselling he's getting, pay the other money leaches and get on with football. Go Browns!!!
A massage professional would shut things down as soon as the alleged behavior started. Sorry man, this massage is over.
I agree with you- several of our Presidents were scumbags- all parties involved. Never stated DW was a saint, he's human and has started counseling. JMHO, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Owners held to "HIGHER" standard than players in personal conduct "Collective Bargaining Agreement"- Kraft got off on a technicality. JMHO, DW had consensual sex with some women, whose business is that. He and God need to figure that one out. He forced no one- no criminal conduct- how do you take away his right to earn a living if his conduct wasn't criminal. Some ladies and gentlemen don't like his conduct- hell, I don't like jaywalkers or speeders. I can see him getting something/ maybe, but anything more than six games for SOCIETIES sake is excessive. I think ZERO can easily be supported- not guilty until proven guilty of something. Go Browns!!!
Your words- egregiousness of this degradation and abuse of women in a serious and just way- they are masseuses, who should be afraid of NO human body part. DW hasn't been charged with ANY CRIMINAL charges- I don't get the folks who judge him- he doesn't think about the body or sex like you do......the NFL should just stone him to death, then some folks would be happy. Long ago we had a President who didn't have sex and didn't commit perjury- and he walked.....DW should continue whatever counselling he's getting, pay the other money leaches and get on with football. Go Browns!!!
A massage professional would shut things down as soon as the alleged behavior started. Sorry man, this massage is over.
Yep, that's what women always do to rich and powerful men who they know could ruin them.
Nothing about watson's statement said he was getting any counseling was of a sexual nature. If you look back and actually read it you will find it was more saying things have been rough on him. And he is getting counseling to be his best self. Nothing more. If you can actually point to anything other than that, please let me know.
Quote
“It’s been a long year and half, I can say that,’’ Watson said last week during mandatory minicamp. “Personally, it’s been tough. And since I came here and since I became a Cleveland Brown, I’ve been able to use all the resources that this organization has. Been able to start using counseling and talking with someone just to make sure that my mental is straight and so I can be prepared to walk on this field and be as sharp as I possibly can.
“And I’m going to continue to do that, be the best person and grow as an individual, grow as a human being, and just be able to be the best citizen, best person that I can be outside this field, and also when I walk out of this building, be the best teammate and player that I can be.’’
I guess if you choose to call massage therapists hookers and say that's their job, you have some issues.
How many women are accusing Kraft of wrong doing? If you still believe that watson only had consensual sex with some women then you must also believe all of these women are liars. That's your choice.
JMHO, DW getting ANY counseling to be his best self is good.....his involvement in numerous positive community activities which have been well received indicates he's not a monster. He probably is getting money management counseling. Your words, not mine calling masseuses hookers, some people would get upset if they saw a person naked....it is just a body. We, you, I ....no one knows what really happened AND there are HUGE differences between what people think happen and what did.....Example- Rudy G says he was assaulted, yet he was tapped on back...check the video....who's right? Depends on your political party.
Watson isn't pure, but he's lot more good than bad. We'll see what happens. I'm pulling for him. Go Browns!!!
JMHO, DW getting ANY counseling to be his best self is good.....his involvement in numerous positive community activities which have been well received indicates he's not a monster. He probably is getting money management counseling. Your words, not mine calling masseuses hookers, some people would get upset if they saw a person naked....it is just a body. We, you, I ....no one knows what really happened AND there are HUGE differences between what people think happen and what did.....Example- Rudy G says he was assaulted, yet he was tapped on back...check the video....who's right? Depends on your political party.
Watson isn't pure, but he's lot more good than bad. We'll see what happens. I'm pulling for him. Go Browns!!!
Having been involved with someone with mental issues this isnt always true. As an example a Narcissist can go to counseling to discuss how badly they are being treated and get help with coping with everything that is unfair to them. There behavior won't change, they won't get help, they are actually fueling their own issue. They have a mask of goodness and serving for outward appearances.
JMHO, WOW, now DW is/ could be a Narcissist. I think Vers has it right, DW might have a strong sexual appetite, but what is normal- who says 66 different masseuses is excessive- in how many YEARS and what was done- who knows. NFL in a no win situation. Snyder leaves the country, yet Congress wants to talk. At least DW has manned up and speaking openly to all parties. Owners held to a higher degree of personal conduct.....really, Jones and Kraft don't seem to be held accountable. NFL sure has some explaining to do before THEIR negotiated judge. She gets to punish Watson for NO CRIMINAL activity- bad situation- Jones and Kraft were in criminal situations....GO Browns!!!
I'd say that having a strong sexual appetite is a long way from being a narcissist.
Women can’t be your thing because with a Stone Age comment like that you just show your ignorance of what these civil law suits is all about.
If you think having a “strong sexual appetite” gives you the freedom to behave like a jerk using inappropriate behavior or sexual harassment then I understand your support for this kind of behavior. 22+ women from the same city on record saying similar things and you still living in denial.
You were there, right. You KNOW he was a jerk, he's a sexual predator. REALLY. TWENTY. So far, 20 have taken the money and run. DW made a business decision- the only people winning are.....LAWYERS. Who run our country too. WOW.
NFL has such any easy decision we will be into DAY 3. JMHO, God knows what happen- no one else, perceptions are different for every human being. I was in aviation safety field- witnesses swore plane on fire, spiraling none of it correct- he said, she said. AGAIN, show the criminal conviction, then abuse DW......Go Browns!!!
What does having a strong sexual appetite have to do with getting a sports massage? They are not prostitutes. Their craft is giving a theraputitic sports massage.
Him exposing his erect penis and directing her to engage in sexual activity that will get him off is shameful.
The vast amount of women who were violated by him indicates he has a sexual addiction of some kind.
Could happen, JFYI, I'd like to bring up a terrible human being, JJ WATT, NFL Man of Year, pretty nice guy with his head on straight- JMHO. He says, DW is a great guy. All he wants for DW is happiness. This is as of 2021- no indication that ANY of Watson's friends have deserted him or changed their minds about him. Food for thought. Go Browns!!!
So let me see if I got this straight. First you claimed he was getting counseling for these sexual issues. Now since after reading his statement you found out that was certainly not something he said at all you have switched up to "any counseling is good" and he does good things in the community?
It sounds like the neighbor on a TV interview saying, "But he seems like such a nice guy, went to church and helped his neighbors. We had no idea he would have *insert terrible thing here*"
What does having a strong sexual appetite have to do with getting a sports massage? They are not prostitutes. Their craft is giving a theraputitic sports massage.
Him exposing his erect penis and directing her to engage in sexual activity that will get him off is shameful.
The vast amount of women who were violated by him indicates he has a sexual addiction of some kind.
He needs mental help. I hope he gets it.
Did you ever notice that it seems only wealthy and powerful men can explain such actions away by calling it "a sexual addiction"? Others get called out for exactly what it is and they're allowed no such excuse.
What does having a strong sexual appetite have to do with getting a sports massage? They are not prostitutes. Their craft is giving a theraputitic sports massage.
Him exposing his erect penis and directing her to engage in sexual activity that will get him off is shameful.
The vast amount of women who were violated by him indicates he has a sexual addiction of some kind.
He needs mental help. I hope he gets it.
Did you ever notice that it seems only wealthy and powerful men can explain such actions away by calling it "a sexual addiction"? Others get called out for exactly what it is and they're allowed no such excuse.
I dont think having sex addiction is an excuse. Its a mental illness that he needs therapy and meds for. Possibly inpatient treadment. Nobody wants that.
Dang, now he possibly needs inpatient treadment...guess treatment. JMHO, I don't think I've changed my mind about anything. DW had sex with some of the masseuses- consensual sex. Some think we should jail all unmarried adults for having sex. How many average Joes are being prosecuted/ or threatened with prosecution for having sex at a massage parlor----NOT MANY, if any. DW likes sex, string him up. NONE of us know what happened. He might have walked into every massage section completely naked. Is that a crime, and could he have hurt feels- the masseuses are in the human body business- if he's nude and they don't like it stop the session, never see him again...etc....I just don't see the big deal. 20 of 24 are over with...money fixed all their problems- I guess.
DW has stated over and over again- I did nothing wrong. Well, in his mind, maybe not- the board has surely judged him. The Browns organization is backing him, the whole team/ his teammates are backing him. Pick up the stone and throw if you are completely pure......who's throwing. GO Browns!!!
Dang, now he possibly needs inpatient treadment...guess treatment. JMHO, I don't think I've changed my mind about anything. DW had sex with some of the masseuses- consensual sex. Some think we should jail all unmarried adults for having sex. How many average Joes are being prosecuted/ or threatened with prosecution for having sex at a massage parlor----NOT MANY, if any. DW likes sex, string him up. NONE of us know what happened. He might have walked into every massage section completely naked. Is that a crime, and could he have hurt feels- the masseuses are in the human body business- if he's nude and they don't like it stop the session, never see him again...etc....I just don't see the big deal. 20 of 24 are over with...money fixed all their problems- I guess.
DW has stated over and over again- I did nothing wrong. Well, in his mind, maybe not- the board has surely judged him. The Browns organization is backing him, the whole team/ his teammates are backing him. Pick up the stone and throw if you are completely pure......who's throwing. GO Browns!!!
Case closed then! Watson has spoken. What’s more to add?
NFL, Deshaun Watson not currently talking about a settlement Posted by Mike Florio on July 7, 2022,
As sports media navigates its way through the task of generating content in the slow time for the NFL, it’s important to try to separate the news from the not news.
Recent comments from Dan Graziano of ESPN.com regarding the prospect of a settlement between the NFL and Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson are not news. Graziano, based on what he said and how he said it, wasn’t trying to make it news. He was just answering a question regarding the potential for a resolution.
Appearing on ESPN Radio, Graziano explained that the two sides had settlement talks during the hearing. He said, as have others, that the league had been pushing for an indefinite suspension of at least one year. Graziano mentioned at one point, by way of further elaboration, that the league at one point had moved the needle for the minimum suspension in Watson’s direction.
“They weren’t able to come close enough late last week,” Graziano said. “The league is still insisting from what I’ve been told on an indefinite suspension that would allow Watson to . . . apply for reinstatement after a certain period of time. Initially they wanted that period to be a year but they moved a little closer to Watson and were talking about, ‘You know, you can reapply after 12 games,’ for example. But Watson is still not interested in signing up for that indefinite suspension.”
It’s important to remember that Graziano isn’t claiming that an offer of 12 games plus an open door for more is even on the table. It wouldn’t matter if it was; Watson didn’t want it.
Now that the hearing is over, Watson’s team is focused on persuading Judge Sue L. Robinson to not suspend him at all. As one source with knowledge of the dynamics pegged the potential for a settlement along the lines that Graziano discussed, “We are far past that point”
Per multiple sources, currently there are no talks. Another source said that, based on the evidence and argument at the hearing, a 12-game, open-ended suspension would not be a serious offer.
Yes, talks could resume at any time. As recently explained, the league will have a hard time settling the case before Judge Robinson issues a ruling, because the league can’t afford to be perceived as being too lenient when it comes to Watson, given that the mishandling of the Ray Rice situation nearly brought down the house in 2014. There’s another reason, however, for the league to perhaps settle this before a ruling is issued by Judge Robinson. But I’ll hold that for a separate post.
After all, we’re also navigating our way through the task of generating content in a slow time for the NFL.
Dang, now he possibly needs inpatient treadment...guess treatment. JMHO, I don't think I've changed my mind about anything. DW had sex with some of the masseuses- consensual sex. Some think we should jail all unmarried adults for having sex. How many average Joes are being prosecuted/ or threatened with prosecution for having sex at a massage parlor----NOT MANY, if any. DW likes sex, string him up. NONE of us know what happened. He might have walked into every massage section completely naked. Is that a crime, and could he have hurt feels- the masseuses are in the human body business- if he's nude and they don't like it stop the session, never see him again...etc....I just don't see the big deal. 20 of 24 are over with...money fixed all their problems- I guess.
DW has stated over and over again- I did nothing wrong. Well, in his mind, maybe not- the board has surely judged him. The Browns organization is backing him, the whole team/ his teammates are backing him. Pick up the stone and throw if you are completely pure......who's throwing. GO Browns!!!
Was the ALL CONSENSUAL bit proven and I missed it? What the NFL did or did not add to it’s case to have him suspended is irrelevant. He was going to prove his innocence one week then settled the next. I’ll decide if I want to root for him when facts come out. If they don’t come out, then he’s guilty in my mind.
Sounds like after the hearings with the NFL last week the NFL did not provide a very case for suspension. All indications are that no violence was used or threats of any kind. Kinda makes sense why 2 different grand juries could not find enough evidence to bring the case to trail. I am starting to get fairly confident that DW will be the Browns week 1 starter. This whole situation started out as a money grab by these women and that is what it is starting to be proven to be. Heck, 1 of the women's own son even admitted so.
You do realize this was all based on the opinion of one persons view of what was contained in the hearings, right? As we've seen on this very board what one person sees as evidence or coercion another person doesn't. Good luck putting all of your eggs in the one man's opinion basket.
I think that one man expected a much stronger case than what was presented. He found out what the grand juries found out. Public Opinion is swayed by the media and does not tell the whole story. In thus case for sure. I still go back to how this whole case started and that was a woman trying to extort $40,000 from Watson. Watson got with his lawyer and told the woman to file a police report and then they will talk. Nothing I have heard since has changed my mind that a woman wanted paid. Other gold diggers then jumped in to try to get paid also. It is sad we live in a society like this now but Watson's action made him vulnerable to be put into this situation.
It's sad that you label 24 women as gold diggers to uphold the actions of one man. The lengths one must go to in order to convince themselves all of these women must be scum bags boggles the mind.
Speaking of trying to control the narrative by the media. Did you see where this "reported son" of one of the accusers turned out not to be a son of any of the women who filed suit against watson? How she came to Buzzbee to represent her but after he vetted her case he turned her down? Did you catch that? Buzzbee actually vetted all of his clients and their stories before agreeing to represent them. Don't pretend both sides aren't using the media in an attempt to control the narrative. And also don't forget that watson's attorney claimed he had a mountain of evidence to discredit all of his accusers..... right before watson paid them.
Was the ALL CONSENSUAL bit proven and I missed it?
Maybe I'm just wearing my Captain Obvious hat today, but he was never under any obligation to prove this, given he's the defendant. I don't believe that has changed now that he's dealing with the NFL judicial/punishment system.
I don't believe that has changed now that he's dealing with the NFL judicial/punishment system.
well, it's not really a judicial system, and the normal judicial rules/laws don't necessarily apply. Additionally, with the wording of the Personal Conduct policy being as widely/loosely defined as it is, they literally have the ability to administer a punishment for the APPEARANCE of doing wrong.
Remember, this is NOT a court of law that he's dealing with in the NFL. It is a corporate equivalent of going to Captain's Mast, with fewer rights, lol
All of that legal stuff applies with his civil cases and any other grand juries that may crop up (was the one in Georgia ever settled?), but not so much with the NFL.
Either way, whether or not he's proven the consensual-ness of the allegations has never been relevant. Again, maybe I'm being nitpicky and and took OCD's post the wrong way.
Yeah, gotcha, and my brain was just focusing on the bit where people seem to be getting hung up on legal stuff again, and it seemed like folks were starting to forget that none of that matters with the NFL because it isn't a court of law.
LOL...I take it you weren't the one to make the call, you were being called.
"The XO needs to see you on the double"...never a good feeling. Heck, even if you didn't do anything, "What did I do?" thoughts are racing through your head. On your way over, paranoid thought creep in as you think everybody along the way is looking at you....LOL
Funny how that works, mine was a dick.....the good guys loved him and "bad" guys hated him.....just depends on which camp you're in.....JMHO, DW issue, the Texans "settled with ALL 30"....no wrong doing, confidential.....lawyer talk, the chicks got their money and the lawyers are smiling all the way to the bank....was justice done...it ain't about justice....it's a MONEY grab.....hope, DW settles with the remaining 4 or whatever.....none of the owners beat up to much, DW should get the NG baby....GO Browns!!!
Yes, there are no victims that file civil suits. Nobody ever gets harassed or abused. Nobody gets taken advantage of. Those seeking at least some form of justice are all scum bags and money grabbers. It must be nice to invent some fantasy world in your brain.
Define victims- lawyers abuse people all the time. They got their justice in form of money- I didn't say they were scum bags- your words. I do believe their main motivation was obtaining money from a millionaire. I'm quite rational, you seem to think your extremely smart- what's your doctorate in.
PS- Do you really think Watson will choose the Browns coaches- extremely doubtful considering a billionaire owns the team.
Yes, Slick Willie should have been convicted of perjury. Here is a thought, since owners in collective bargaining agreement are held to a HIGHER standard than players, I wonder if the players would consider a work stoppage to get fair treatment if Watson was severely punished. No games until he is given a fair deal. I think that would be fair indeed.....Power to the people. Not just the owners.
the chicks got their money and the lawyers are smiling all the way to the bank....was justice done...it ain't about justice....it's a MONEY grab.....
Yes, you made them out to be scum bags. You just didn't use those words. Don't back down now.
I am certainly not saying any of the women are scumbags without meeting them, but all of them could have very easily shut the session down and walked out.
I have NO idea where you got scumbags out of what I posted.....I'll "standby" my opinion the women saw an opportunity to make some money off of a rich man. That has been done since the start of creation. Note: the NFL threw out one of their cases based on differing opinions- first Watson was great/decent guy, then after cases arose she changed her tune...."the ME TOO" cases. She was going to reward her son for keeping quiet. JMHO, I'm sure there were more of those types in the cases. Any masseuse making what- $40,000 a year, she gets a shot at a $250 million dollar guy.....who's in fantasy land. Money always talks.
I think that is the least realistic of all the theories that have been presented. I could see a handful, not 22. 24, 26, or 30... Am I the only one that is bothered that the number seems to keep growing? The same attorney represented 30 women against the Texans, sounds like more is on the way for DW unless there were previous settlements we don't know about, how could they not go after him too?
So are you telling me that by your standards a woman which by your description "I'll "standby" my opinion the women saw an opportunity to make some money off of a rich man. That has been done since the start of creation.", wouldn't be considered a scum bag?
And you do realize that the woman with the son you mentioned was NOT one of Buzzbee's clients in the lawsuits, correct?
In your world there must be 30 women who are all crooks trying to extort money from watson and he must be the beacon of truth. Sad, just sad.
I'm not an expert on human sexuality, nor on scum bags, nor on the massage parlor business.....check out this video-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7LNpFuQY1A, interesting what she says about American massage parlors vs the use of the word masseuse. Wonder how many of these women called themselves masseuses vs massage therapists. Hope DW isn't getting any massages other than at the Browns facility.
So women you describe as money grabbers out to extort rich men for money aren't what you consider scum bags. Mmmm hmmmmm.....
So now you're using an "I wonder" as a yet another way to undermine the women. You have no idea how you sound here. So you have zero evidence that any of these women were questionable. You have no idea if any of these buzz words were used by any of these women. Yet you just throw it out there... I mean, just because, right? Dear Lord.
OR could they? We don't really know any of that. It's not like they were in public. DW liked to get them alone in a private setting, like Cosby.
I am sure if that is the case, if they were forcibly detained in some manner, I am pretty confident that would have been a issue for the grand jury and criminal charges would have been levied.
OR could they? We don't really know any of that. It's not like they were in public. DW liked to get them alone in a private setting, like Cosby.
I am sure if that is the case, if they were forcibly detained in some manner, I am pretty confident that would have been a issue for the grand jury and criminal charges would have been levied.
Not only did the GJ refuse to indict Watson, but the NFL has found"no evidence that Watson engaged in violence, made threats, applied coercion, or used force." OCD has admitted that his sole purpose this year is to troll others about Watson and the Browns.
OR could they? We don't really know any of that. It's not like they were in public. DW liked to get them alone in a private setting, like Cosby.
I am sure if that is the case, if they were forcibly detained in some manner, I am pretty confident that would have been a issue for the grand jury and criminal charges would have been levied.
A young woman put in a certain position, in unfamiliar high-end surroundings alone with a rich and famous man that pulls this crap would first be stunned it is happening. Her mind would race through should she go along for numerous reasons including her business future, how does she call him out safely, how is this even happening, etc., etc., etc. Being "forcibly detained" would never have to be part of the MIND SCREWING the rapey ass man puts her through. If your wife or daughter shared a limo ride with a rich dude, and he started masturbating in front of them and coming on to them like they needed to participate BECAUSE HE IS RICH AND FAMOUS while making them think things may not go well for her business, life, etc. if they don't go along, you would be okay with that? PUH-lease. None of us know the facts! I'd love to know the Browns aren't being led by THAT PERSON on Sundays so I could feel good about rooting for them like I have my whole life. If it were your wife or daughter that had been through this with you knowing it happened but never having all the facts, even from your loved ones for whatever NDA, can you really say you'd root for the man on Sundays? We both know you wouldn't. Matter of fact, you would probably want him dead.
The disconnect here is none of us know the facts or have personal relationships with any of these women. We don't know anything other than it happened, AND IT HAPPENED A LOT! It takes a pretty low morality to just brush off these women under those circumstances, IMHO. And even with this judge, she got presented with 5 cases? That makes it doubtful that she knows any more than I do about what actually happened. And after watching all the male reactions to this on here, it's easy to think that a 50% male GJ would let him off without all the facts too. Unlike those who obviously don't give a damn about the women because a stupid-ass game is more important, or stacking the deck for a Super Bowl run is more important, I just want the facts. But we are not going to get many more details because the NFL is doing its best to make it go away and sweep it under the rug.
I would have been much more willing to accept the settlements had DW not insisted he was innocent of all wrongdoing right up to the point he suddenly settled. The Texans settling so fast when they supposedly had nothing to do with it... BS. That screams coverup to me. At the very minimum, this entire situation has 'icky af' all over it. And the hell of it is the DW was highly regarded before any of this came out, said he wanted to COMPLETELY CLEAR HIS NAME, then a week later settles with a big ass check to all of them. And I get the settlement to save bit, but this doesn't sound like something a high-character guy who claims to be completely innocent would go along with or do, IMHO. The whole situation is just rapey and disgusting, both the player and the NFL look very bad to me now.
So he didn't have them come to him, in a private setting of his choosing for a massage, and then start to tug his junk trying to have sex with them? Cosby got his victims alone and drugged them, different methods to the same ends. Rich guy, private setting, unexpected sexual actions, and 'rapey' as hell.
By the way, the definition of rapey is not the same as a rapist for those who struggle with English: Rapey - sexually aggressive or inappropriate in a way that causes fear or unease."I always got a real rapey vibe from them"
Yet, I know damn well you understand English Vers, so stop acting like you don't. And yes, I want to know if he's a rapey predator, a kid with an absurd sex addiction, the target of some big money attempt to ruin him, or being gifted by an attorney and 24, 26, 30, 66... whoever knows how many women. I don't know many decent people who wouldn't want those facts to form their opinions.
How many times have you, as a young woman, been in this situation so that we can understand how you speak for young women from personal experience.
You're ridiculous.
I'm not the telling people how young women respond to situations. And I am certainly not the one implying that, as a group, they would react the same way which IS ridiculous.
So he didn't have them come to him, in a private setting of his choosing for a massage, and then start to tug his junk trying to have sex with them?
I have never said he did or didn't because I don't know the truth. Neither do you, but that doesn't stop you and others of pretending you know he is guilty.
Yet the claim is that in a he said/she said it's one persons word against another so that would not have made any difference.
It would have made a difference with the grand jury. They aren't hearing cases there. They hear evidence as presented by the prosecutor. Trust me, if there had been any, the prosecutor would have presented the evidence, and the grand just would have returned a true bill. The DA talked to some of these people, and Buzzbee most clearly did and I don't think he ever accused any force. You do understand what the GJ hears and why are the impaneled, right?
So he didn't have them come to him, in a private setting of his choosing for a massage, and then start to tug his junk trying to have sex with them?
I have never said he did or didn't because I don't know the truth. Neither do you, but that doesn't stop you and others of pretending you know he is guilty.
I've said many times that I wanted the guy to prove his innocence like he said he wanted to do, so I could feel good about rooting for him. DW, his legal team, and the NFL flipped the script on that, not me. So as you just admitted, "because I don't know the truth", is the same reason I'm not comfortable with I'm. And yes, the swing for me went against him vs. the swing for many posters going on to blame the women because they want him playing. With this number of women, that is equivalent to victim shaming or blaming IMO. And even though you don't like it, he fits the definition of 'rapey' to a tee.
Never asked you to feel comfortable w/him. I'm just saying that I don't believe in the mob mentality of assigning guilt to those who have not been convicted of a crime in a court of law.
I get that, but you should also acknowledge that 22-30-66 women isn't a coincidence and is pretty damning in its own right, even without the facts. That's the point I refuse to simply gloss over. Add in the Texans' actions and it compounds everything else we know, regardless of the BS statement they made. Nobody really believes they just handed out a couple of million dollars to be the good guys for no reason, do they? I don't. The whole thing, including the limited info for the judge, just screams coverup and I know you are smart enough to see that.
If the NFL really wanted an indefinite suspension, she would have been given the full case reports on all of these women, and the time to delve into the individual cases would have been taken. But no, they presented 5 cherry-picked cases.
I would have been much more willing to accept the settlements had DW not insisted he was innocent of all wrongdoing right up to the point he suddenly settled.
I don't get this take at all (and I know I've been throwing a lot of snark and frustration around, but right now I'm being sincere). Why would not putting up a fight at all be any more acceptable? IMO, that's WAY more of an admission of guilt than crying uncle after duking it out in the court of public opinion (IMO). Especially since you think what the Texans did is shady as hell (which I agree with).
The Florio video did bring up an interesting angle... that being that the owners might not have been aware even though their staff was enabling. I didn't think of that... that's actually pretty believable.
Im ready to move on from this crap pile. When will the NFL lady make her decision?
I am not sure. Most insiders have said the week that TC opens or the week after. They say she is not in any hurry. I think the Browns open TC on the 27th, but I'm not positive about the exact date.
I'm w/you in that i wish it would just end, but it is what it is.
I would have been much more willing to accept the settlements had DW not insisted he was innocent of all wrongdoing right up to the point he suddenly settled.
I don't get this take at all (and I know I've been throwing a lot of snark and frustration around, but right now I'm being sincere). Why would not putting up a fight at all be any more acceptable? IMO, that's WAY more of an admission of guilt than crying uncle after duking it out in the court of public opinion (IMO). Especially since you think what the Texans did is shady as hell (which I agree with).
The Florio video did bring up an interesting angle... that being that the owners might not have been aware even though their staff was enabling. I didn't think of that... that's actually pretty believable.
If you think about it, the difference between your take and my take is that they are only different angles of the same view. I was looking at the same thing from the opposite side, I completely agree with your take too. And both look shady to me.
Never asked you to feel comfortable w/him. I'm just saying that I don't believe in the mob mentality of assigning guilt to those who have not been convicted of a crime in a court of law.
Certainly a mob of 26 women made no impact. And you know that the NFL has no threshold of "in a court of law". Neither does a civil trial. You really need to stop with the false equivalency here.
I'm not quite sure if this applies but I know in certain instances that if your employees cause harm or do damage it's the employer that's responsible. The standard used is that they are acting as "your agent under your employment". As such it's not the employees who are considered responsible for any damages incurred but the employer. That may be the standard used here.
Either it's a he said/she said case where opposing testimony means nothing or it isn't. Saying "well it is unless" makes no sense.
It makes sense even if you don't understand what I said. Maybe you need to go back and read what I said and actually think about it for a few moments. I will add that you need to go back and read all the comments leading up to that post. It was a continuation of thought that goes back to the conversation that led to that last comment.
Your big problem is you get in to so many skirmishes you can't keep track of a thought progression.
Read a lot of posts, not all....the owners angle- they didn't know/ employees covered up- might work, but KRAFT- he had sex, off because cops got evidence illegally- league punishment- ZIP. My position has been women are after MONEY- I hadn't know some of the so called "facts" about DW's ways for "forcing sexual contact"- ie. he came to massages with a SMALL TOWEL covering his junk- IF true, and I don't doubt it....bottomline- if the women are "professional" they turn around and leave- they CHOSE to stay. Why- they wanted to earn MONEY. In my book, they don't get a pass for staying and being forced/ no one forced them, they KNEW right of the bat what was wanted. Most have settled for MORE MONEY, so far, four either want their day in court or want more money.....time will tell. Please don't tell me a body part scared these women- any body part. Culture sure has changed- if you told a 20 year old in the 50s the YMCA had swimming where everyone was NAKED- they'd say you're liar or stupid. Well, YMCA's had curtains separating the pool into halves- boys and girls....no woke back then....and we all swam NAKED because some couldn't afford suits for big families and there was no body shaming. We all got bodies and they shouldn't hurt anyone. Go Browns!!!
Numbers game....how many walked out after seeing too small a towel....professional vs money. DW's human, he's 26 and likes sex-----crimes all around. I hope he isn't getting massages in Cleveland. Go Browns!!!
None I'm aware of. The hilarious part about it is that some people can't seem to understand the word "consensual" and try to act like there isn't a huge difference here in their zeal to make excuses for watson.
Since your English is so impeccable try looking up the definition of consensual. Desperation to make up excuses for terrible behavior causes reactions like yours.
I'm sure his actions were against league policy.. That's not what Pit asked however. He asked if there were any women accusing Kraft,,, I don't know of any.... do you?
Sexual trafficking is considered rape by almost everyone. The women don't have the power to accuse anyone of anything. It's a problem that plagues not only our nation, but the world.
The topic of this thread is about whether or not he should be suspended or not. Those who want him suspended argue that the fact that Watson has not been charged, nevermind convicted, of a crime is not relevant because it is all about him violating the Personal Conduct Policy. Well, according to the terms of the Personal Conduct Policy, Kraft violated it and he didn't receive any punishment at all. There is even video evidence of Kraft's actions.
The NFLPA is using Kraft, along w/Snyder and Jones, as examples of precedence in how the NFL deals w/players vs owners despite their claim that the owners are to be held to a higher standard. Kraft walked for worse violations, thus Watson should not be punished.
Sexual trafficking is considered rape by almost everyone. The women don't have the power to accuse anyone of anything. It's a problem that plagues not only our nation, but the world.
The topic of this thread is about whether or not he should be suspended or not. Those who want him suspended argue that the fact that Watson has not been charged, nevermind convicted, of a crime is not relevant because it is all about him violating the Personal Conduct Policy. Well, according to the terms of the Personal Conduct Policy, Kraft violated it and he didn't receive any punishment at all. There is even video evidence of Kraft's actions.
The NFLPA is using Kraft, along w/Snyder and Jones, as examples of precedence in how the NFL deals w/players vs owners despite their claim that the owners are to be held to a higher standard. Kraft walked for worse violations, thus Watson should not be punished.
This is a total canard. Kraft was never accused of anything other than having a consensual encounter at a Florida massage parlor. There were no charges than involved human trafficking. "Sexual trafficking" sounds like a term you just made up to conflate soliciting with human trafficking.
Numbers game....how many walked out after seeing too small a towel....professional vs money. DW's human, he's 26 and likes sex-----crimes all around. I hope he isn't getting massages in Cleveland. Go Browns!!!
Stop being so asinine. Most 26-year-olds like sex. Also, most 26-year-olds that like sex don't lay in wait under the guise of requesting a private massage as a star athlete to acquire said sex... smh. Do you guys even read what you write?
Robert Kraft had sex with 58-year-old Shen Mingbi. Police said Mingbi's safety deposit box at Bank of America contained approximately $43,800 in U.S. currency. She wasn't some victim of human trafficking.
We know he had sex with her because a camera was illegally planted by police. The same camera that would have been illegal if video evidence was presented in Watson's trial.
Yet somehow we are supposed to believe no video evidence means Watson did nothing wrong... while video evidence of Kraft having consensual sex with a prostitute makes him a sexual predator. And since this was all part of sting to find victims of human trafficking... that also makes Kraft a rapist by association because "many consider it rape" if a person is the victim of trafficking.
In other words -- no camera on Watson means consensual sex; camera on Kraft having sex with a prostitute means rape.
You would have better luck hanging an elephant over a cliff by his tail than stringing all of that conspiracy together to equal rape. Whack. Some may just say, as one poster put it, Watson Kraft just has a "strong sexual desire".
Oh yeah, Kraft was also caught on video giving cash to another woman -- 39-year-old Lei [censored] (W.a.n.g.), who was facing multiple charges including soliciting, enticing, and procuring others to commit prostitution. She was manager of the spa. She bonded out, at $75,000, and was then under house arrest at her home in Hobe Sound (median home cost over $400,000), where she lives with her husband and son.
Nothing to see here folks, no way to compare the two cases other than "no fair! rich white guy!"
And not co-signing on the ridiculous narrative has nothing to do with being a Browns fan, hating Watson, wishing for the Browns to be losers, loving Baker, or any of that other gibberish.
Once again, I encourage people who have an open mind to read the articles and decide for themselves if the attention brought to Kraft were violations of the Personal Conduct Policy. Watson has not been charged or convicted of a crime. Kraft was charged, but his case was dismissed due to a technicality because other patrons were filmed by the same camera that the sting operation used against Kraft. Those who want to see Watson punished continually point to the fact that the NFL doesn't need a criminal charge or a conviction to punish its members because it's all about what the Personal Conduct Policy.
So again, please ignore the insulting labels like gibberish and canard that posters throw out there and read the articles for yourselves and then read the Personal Conduct Policy and see if both men have violated the terms of the Personal Conduct Policy. You can also google the Daniel Snyder case [who is being investigated by Congress] and the Jerry Jones case.
Decide for yourselves the truth and that way we can spare the back and forth bickering between posters that is a distraction from what really is transpiring in this case.
Sexual trafficking is considered rape by almost everyone. The women don't have the power to accuse anyone of anything. It's a problem that plagues not only our nation, but the world.
The topic of this thread is about whether or not he should be suspended or not. Those who want him suspended argue that the fact that Watson has not been charged, nevermind convicted, of a crime is not relevant because it is all about him violating the Personal Conduct Policy. Well, according to the terms of the Personal Conduct Policy, Kraft violated it and he didn't receive any punishment at all. There is even video evidence of Kraft's actions.
The NFLPA is using Kraft, along w/Snyder and Jones, as examples of precedence in how the NFL deals w/players vs owners despite their claim that the owners are to be held to a higher standard. Kraft walked for worse violations, thus Watson should not be punished.
I'm honestly not sure of what Watson did or didn't do. But the one thing I'm sure of is that he's a bit of a fool for doing what we must acknowledge what's clear and has been reported.
He's a wealthy young black man in America. He had resources available to him through the team he played for.. I'm sure they'd have provided all the massage therapy he wanted..
But NO.. he decided to go off on his own and hire shady women to do whatever he was requesting.
Last I heard, being a fool isn't a criminal offense.. At this point, that's the only thing that is confirmed...
One can say, if it happened once, then that sounds believable that it's on the woman.. But what's the count up to now,, 30, 60? I don't know. But it's too many to call it a fluke.
Watson must have felt entitled to some degree..
I've said it before, Watson is probably a better QB than Mayfield, but he's not even close to being a better man.
Last I heard, being a fool isn't a criminal offense.. At this point, that's the only thing that is confirmed...
What does he being a black man have to do with anything? Do black men get a pass for being rapey? I must have missed that one in the law or whatever rules apply. And I agree at minimum he's a fool, but the reports also confirm he is rapey.
Quote
Dictionary Definitions from Oxford Languages
rapey /ˈrāpē/ adjectiveINFORMAL sexually aggressive or inappropriate in a way that causes fear or unease. "I always got a real rapey vibe from them"
I'm done with this topic, hope DW gets no or short suspension. Ashley Solis, Watson's most public accuser wanted $100,000 to keep quiet about his actions. That was reported early and not denied by her lawyer. Simple in my book, this has always been about MOSTLY money.
It's amazing that on a Browns message board, we have posters wanting a Brown to be punished while defending the behavior of guys from other teams.
So that's how you describe people who think these women deserve justice and watson should be held accountable for his actions? And that because no women in the Kraft situation even claimed they were victims you try to make it sound like they're the same thing?
I'm done with this topic, hope DW gets no or short suspension. Ashley Solis, Watson's most public accuser wanted $100,000 to keep quiet about his actions. That was reported early and not denied by her lawyer. Simple in my book, this has always been about MOSTLY money.
Show us. And if that's all she wanted, watson offered them all 100k and she turned it down the first time in 2021..... and she turned down the second settlement offer a few weeks ago.
It's amazing that on a Browns message board, we have posters wanting a Brown to be punished while defending the behavior of guys from other teams.
So that's how you describe people who think these women deserve justice and watson should be held accountable for his actions? And that because no women in the Kraft situation even claimed they were victims you try to make it sound like they're the same thing?
Why would nobody be surprised by that?
It amazes me after all the high character digs these same posters made about Baker, that they have zero issues with the new guy. I smell something FAKE.
It's amazing that on a Browns message board, we have posters wanting a Brown to be punished while defending the behavior of guys from other teams.
So that's how you describe people who think these women deserve justice and watson should be held accountable for his actions? And that because no women in the Kraft situation even claimed they were victims you try to make it sound like they're the same thing?
Why would nobody be surprised by that?
It amazes me after all the high character digs these same posters made about Baker, that they have zero issues with the new guy. I smell something FAKE.
Baker fans resorting to personal attacks yet again because they can't formulate a decent rebuttal.
Neither Kraft or Watson was charged w/a crime. Kraft got off on a technicality. No charges were ever brought against Watson. Both men were in violation of the Personal Conduct Policy. One got off w/out so much as a slap on the wrist and the league is trying to trying to impose an indefinite suspension on the other. That is not equitable treatment and the NFL should not be permitted to get away w/such outright bias.
One more thing. I have Pit on ignore, but OCD quoted him and I see the claim of "these women deserve justice..." The NFL suspending Watson does not equate to "justice" for the women. If crimes were committed against these women, and that is a big if, then justice would be decided by a criminal court. Hell, they even have an opportunity to find monetary compensation through the civil courts. However, the NFL is incapable of providing justice.
Furthermore, the same folks who want "justice" for Watson's accusers, don't care about justice for the women who are forced into the illegal sex trade. They talk about no women coming forward, yet they ignore the articles and how the women are basically sex slaves and can't even speak English.
Last I heard, being a fool isn't a criminal offense.. At this point, that's the only thing that is confirmed...
What does he being a black man have to do with anything? Do black men get a pass for being rapey? I must have missed that one in the law or whatever rules apply. And I agree at minimum he's a fool, but the reports also confirm he is rapey.
Quote
Dictionary Definitions from Oxford Languages
rapey /ˈrāpē/ adjectiveINFORMAL sexually aggressive or inappropriate in a way that causes fear or unease. "I always got a real rapey vibe from them"
WOW, did you ever over read and over think that one. It's rather simple,, Wealthy Young black men appear to be held to a higher standard... Not right, but it is what it is
Eugene Robinson was arrested for solicitation less than 24 hours before the Super Bowl -- he was allowed to play in the game and was never suspended.
Seventeen members of the 2005 Vikings hired 90-110 prostitutes for their cruise on the "Love Boat"... no one was suspended.
The NFL has never suspended anyone for soliciting prostitution.
I don't know how everyone was raised or where the needle on their moral compass may stick; but paying for sex is not the same as trying to force someone to have sex.
The illegal sex trade is illegal. The illegal sex trade equates to rape.
Both Kraft and Watson were accused of crimes. Neither was charged. All that is left is the Personal Conduct Policy. Both men have brought unwanted attention to the league due to the allegations levied against them. The NFL relies on their Personal Conduct Policy and not the actual legal system. Both men have violated the Personal Conduct Policy, yet the NFL has treated them differently.
I know that guys who utter phrases like "liar, liar, pants on fire" think they are geniuses, but Kessler, the NFLPA's lead attorney on this case and the most respected name in Sports Law, has made precedence [owners vs players] the focal point of his case. I think his word carries more weight than someone who posts baby gifs on the internet to win an argument.
Furthermore, the same folks who want "justice" for Watson's accusers, don't care about justice for the women who are forced into the illegal sex trade. They talk about no women coming forward, yet they ignore the articles and how the women are basically sex slaves and can't even speak English.
Talk about "fake."
Fake is claiming these women were forced into anything.
Every official statement has stated: no violence, force, or coercion.
As far as I know that is what has been published.
This came from the opinion of one person on how he interpreted what he heard. Nothing more. Rest your laurels on that one. Many others have. In case you missed it, that's not an "official statement".
Three days of testimony and argument have concluded. Per a source with knowledge of the proceedings, some relevant information appears below.
First, the NFL interviewed 12 women who are making allegations against the Browns quarterback. Five cases became the focal point of the league’s presentation.
Second, the NFL’s case included no evidence that Watson engaged in violence, made threats, applied coercion, or used force."
This was in reports from yahoo, wkyc, and PFT.
If there was evidence of that it would be resonable to believe that he would have been indicted by the GJ.
I still don't know what happened by this is what has been reported.
Furthermore, the same folks who want "justice" for Watson's accusers, don't care about justice for the women who are forced into the illegal sex trade. They talk about no women coming forward, yet they ignore the articles and how the women are basically sex slaves and can't even speak English.
Talk about "fake."
Fake is claiming these women were forced into anything.
Once again, you realize this isn't an official statement, right? This is the opinion of what someone heard. I have pointed this out several times but I guess it appears repeating.
We see it on this very board where two people read the exact same thing and come to a different conclusion as to what it means. Whether they even consider it evidence at all.
Even spitting on a person is now considered assault in the eyes of the law while many people do not consider that an assault. Once again, this was one's persons interpretation of what he heard.
Can you explain that if none of the NFL's evidence carried any weight at all, why did the hearing take three days? Surely you can't believe that the case took three days and the NFL provided nothing of substance based on the opinion of what one person thought of the testimony can you?
It's freaking. sad that people will ignore what guys like Kraft did and deem Watson guilty despite no tangible evidence all because they are upset that Baker has been sent packing. Twisting words around to fit their narrow agenda. Denying the truth. Go root for Carolina.
It's freaking. sad that people will ignore what guys like Kraft did and deem Watson guilty despite no tangible evidence all because they are upset that Baker has been sent packing. Twisting words around to fit their narrow agenda. Denying the truth. Go root for Carolina.
Another lie driven by agenda. No poster's opinion of Watson and what he did is impacted by the player who is no longer on the Browns. Just one more of the many agenda driven narratives you have spammed the boards with over the years. And I only call it a lie because that's what you do, and I figure what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
I'm glad you heard all of the testimony in the three day hearing. I don't know that he did force anyone any more than you know he didn't.
No, but he wasn't charged criminally. If he had forced women in to performing sex acts, he would have been charged and be facing criminal prosecution rather than being in civil court. I am just connecting the dots based on what is being reported and what hasn't happened after the previous inquiries.
I admit that is all on which I can base my opinion.
If there was force or coercion, it is still "he said vs she said". It's still a sexual case of which t regardless iof evidence, the chance of conviction based on national statistics is woefully low.
So not only does the GJ decision not mean that DW is innocent, it also doesn't mean he did or did not try to coerce the women and it says nothing regards an allegation of force... He's accused of trying to initiate contact with his genitals, grabbing a hand and pushing it towards his groin is using force in that situation.
If there was force or coercion, it is still "he said vs she said". It's still a sexual case of which t regardless iof evidence, the chance of conviction based on national statistics is woefully low.
So not only does the GJ decision not mean that DW is innocent, it also doesn't mean he did or did not try to coerce the women and it says nothing regards an allegation of force... He's accused of trying to initiate contact with his genitals, grabbing a hand and pushing it towards his groin is using force in that situation.
Possibly so.
For me at least, I am not willing to condemn a person based on the "possible".
![[Linked Image from media.giphy.com]](https://media.giphy.com/media/90F8aUepslB84/giphy.gif)
![[Linked Image from media.giphy.com]](https://media.giphy.com/media/hSLn2rOC2R34WKX0g4/giphy.gif)
