This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
That there was sexual assault as defined by the NFL, not as defined by any criminal statute. (And the NFL composed its definition specifically for the Watson case. Non-violent sexual assault is not defined in the Personal Conduct Policy. Violent sexual assault is defined in the Personal Conduct Policy, but it was undisputed that Watson's alleged behavior did not meet that definition.)
That’s an important distinction, thanks for the education.
I have a hard time believing that if there was video that it hasn't been released or used in any of these proceedings or the DA, NFL, etc stating they have a video (even if it isn't released to the public).
Same, but then, many, many women have been paid. Certainly there was *some* evidence beyond he said/she said.
Both Kraft and Watson tried to turn massages into sex acts. The principal difference in their crimes is Watson participated in two dozen instances of "non-violent sexual harassment" and Kraft participated in human sex trafficking.
And this is the perfect illustration of why “whataboutism” is a logical fallacy.
2 things:
I think what you described is (mostly) within the range of potential outcomes - in at least some of the cases and quite possibly most of them. The guy (allegedly) had massages with 66 different women over a 17 month period, 25 filed suit, 20 settled, the NFL presented 4, and I've never thought it was a gaffe on Rusty Hardin's part to say (paraphrasing) happy endings aren't illegal. That math is...an eyebrow raiser.
The investigators mentioned human sex trafficking to the press, but I don't think that was part of any charges filed in that matter.
As far as Kraft goes, living in NE, his situation stayed in the news seemingly forever. This is what I remember (all of which likely played a role in Kraft's case getting tossed and the league letting him skate). There were a lot of shenanigans with the Kraft case.
Correct. But I don't need the weatherman to tell me that the sun is shining in Paso Robles today.
Paso Robles? Interesting choice of location...
Excellent breakdown, thank you for that.
It's where I am ATM (Barton + Grey Wolf winery).
I don't know what you're getting at with some of this. Robinson's ruling didn't vindicate Watson at all. Did you read what she wrote? Also, where in the CBA does it say her ruling is binding? The only thing binding about her judgement is the facts she laid out, and they in no way, shape or form vindicate Watson.
Optics in these situations are key. Kraft's spin doctors were able to diffuse the situation and portray him as the victim (a lonely and grieving old man missing his deceased wife and getting railroaded by a crooked DA and some keystone cops). The first thing Kraft did was apologize. He also donated millions of dollars to women's groups.
Wait a minute; this guy's wife?
Maybe, but step back and consider that 24 women accused him of "non-violent sexual harassment", he solicited 60+ such encounters over a 17 month time frame (when, I am pretty sure the Texans would have given him all the free massages he needed) and has not only shown zero remorse, but apparently still believes he did nothing wrong in the first place (ie he seems to believe "they really wanted it").
This is why I take exception to the charade.... one would think the players/union would have some concern their collectively bargained judicial process means nothing.
www.youtube.com
Are we 100% sure all of these women are telling the truth regarding what exactly happened?
Again, this is not a legally binding arbitration process. This is an NFL arbitration process. Also, EVERYONE knew ahead of time that whoever didn't like the suspension ruling would appeal it so her 6 games didn't vindicate Watson at all. As I said, the facts she laid out are the only part of this process both sides are bound to and she didn't vindicate Watson in that part at all. In fact, just the opposite. She gave the NFL what it needs to get a much longer suspension thru the appeal process. Considering both sides agreed to it, I have a hard time calling it unfair. It definitely favors the NFL, but if the NFLPA didn't think it was fair they shouldn't have agreed to it.
Kraft didn't turn a massage into a sex act. He went to an establishment in business for that type of thing while masquerading as a "massage parlor". It was sex for money and very different from Watson. Also, despite early reports of human trafficking that was never the case. In fact, it's one of the reasons I withhold judgement in cases such as Watsons. There is always some level of speculation which is inevitably inaccurate.
that seems totally sincere
Ok, technically on the pretty much 0% chance nobody was going to appeal, it would have been binding. In reality, everyone knew it was going to be appealed, including Robinson, and she gave the NFL exactly what it needed to appeal and get a much harsher penalty. She in no way vindicated Watson with her ruling. And in the end, the ruling that will actually be binding is not going to be anything close to a vindication for Watson.
Agreed. It sounded more like he was apologizing to his mom (the women he's impacted) than the women he victimized.
I'm hoping the punishment is enough that other players are like
Same, but then, many, many women have been paid. Certainly there was *some* evidence beyond he said/she said.
All probably irrelevant at this point anyway. We’re all just killing time until we hear the next milestone from the arbitrator.
