Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

QB Deshaun Watson - present at the start of Texans training camp.


Faust

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, kutta said:

Not necessarily. It's usually not too hard to imagine what the other side will say in their defense. I'm not coming up with anything that makes sense.9

I'm just thankful our legal system does not operate the way you think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, zoonation said:

So you’re going with they are fabricating evidence?  There is an entire story about it.  I agree it is boiler plate junk.  Precisely the sort of thing Watson himself would pull off the internet and ignorantly believe protected him. 

I don’t like how things look for Watson, but this NDA piece is ridiculous. Who is this lady even posting it?  It’s been up all day and has like 6 retweets. Why should I believe her?

 

also is not evidence.  It’s literally a blank NDA that no one has signed. 

Edited by bigmarc27
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bigmarc27 said:

I don’t like how things look for Watson, but this NDA piece is ridiculous. Who is this lady even posting it?  It’s been up all day and has like 6 retweets. Why should I believe her?

 

also is not evidence.  It’s literally a blank NDA that no one has signed. 

I may have read some bad info but understood one of the plaintiff signed it, returned it, and asked for a signed copy back but didn’t get one.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Soulfly3 said:

then he should be criminally charged. 

 

11 minutes ago, kutta said:

He may be.

Yes this is a possibility and I wanted to add since one instance was alleged to have occurred in CA and another in GA we do have 3 different jurisdictions that could decide they have enough to move forward with criminal charges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, zoonation said:

I may have read some bad info but understood one of the plaintiff signed it, returned it, and asked for a signed copy back but didn’t get one.  

What she has there is a blank NDA that has Watson’s named typed in at the top. They claim the victim signed one but she doesn’t have a copy, they haven’t claimed to have seen a signed NDA, there is zero proof a signed NDA exists. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, bigmarc27 said:

What she has there is a blank NDA that has Watson’s named typed in at the top. They claim the victim signed one but she doesn’t have a copy, they haven’t claimed to have seen a signed NDA, there is zero proof a signed NDA exists. 

Yet.  If she signed and scanned to him she may still have a copy.  And, if she can prove he sent one to her the damage is done (so far as an NDA can do any damage).  Whether she signed it or not is irrelevant.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, zoonation said:

Yet.  If she signed and scanned to him she may still have a copy.  And, if she can prove he sent one to her the damage is done (so far as an NDA can do any damage).  Whether she signed it or not is irrelevant.  

Sure, so when there’s proof, I’ll care. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, menobrown said:

That is allows both sides to be heard before making their determination.

OK. Not sure why you think I think it doesn't work that way? Weird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kutta said:

OK. Not sure why you think I think it doesn't work that way? Weird.

You mean other then you saying you read one side, said it looks bad, can't offer a plausible explanation for his behavior and then proceeded to say that you can imagine his defense and none of it would make sense. Yea, that's really weird of me to think you are waiting for him to have his say before determining his guilt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, menobrown said:

You mean other then you saying you read one side, said it looks bad, can't offer a plausible explanation for his behavior and then proceeded to say that you can imagine his defense and none of it would make sense. Yea, that's really weird of me to think you are waiting for him to have his say before determining his guilt.

What does any of that have to do how I think the legal systems works?

You're usually pretty level-headed. Seems like you're a tad emotional here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kutta said:

What does any of that have to do how I think the legal systems works?

You're usually pretty level-headed. Seems like you're a tad emotional here.

And you are usually not one to lower yourself to insults but when I don't agree with you when I'm suddenly weird and emotional.  I'm not the one who sounds triggered here.

And you misunderstand what I wrote. I never said you think the legal system works differently. What I said was the legal system thankfully works better then it does in your thoughts were you are ready to determine guilt based on hearing just one side.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, menobrown said:

And you are usually not one to lower yourself to insults but when I don't agree with you when I'm suddenly weird and emotional.  I'm not the one who sounds triggered here.

And you misunderstand what I wrote. I never said you think the legal system works differently. What I said was the legal system thankfully works better then it does in your thoughts were you are ready to determine guilt based on hearing just one side.

 

That's not what you said, but OK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bigmarc27 said:

Maybe before. I’m not vouching for innocence, I just want to see the actual and real evidence. 

He is accused of rubbing his #### on women, among other things.  What kind of evidence would you expect when something like that happens?  This case is always going to be "he said, 20 women said".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Synthesizer said:

He is accused of rubbing his #### on women, among other things.  What kind of evidence would you expect when something like that happens?  This case is always going to be "he said, 20 women said".

He said / she said isn’t enough for me to indict someone. Text messages, physical evidence. There must be some reason this lawyer believes these women, I want to see what it is. 
 

edit: a videotape with Deshaun’s mom filming Deshaun while he’s holding up 2 forms of ID saying “that’s my won, always rubbing his genitals during massages.”

Edited by bigmarc27
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bigmarc27 said:

He said / she said isn’t enough for me to indict someone. Text messages, physical evidence. There must be some reason this lawyer believes these women, I want to see what it is. 
 

edit: a videotape with Deshaun’s mom filming Deshaun while he’s holding up 2 forms of ID saying “that’s my won, always rubbing his genitals during massages.”

So, based on your required standard, you’d agree that many women could be sexually assaulted and not have the evidence necessary to convince you.  

No cameras in here? I’ll whip it out and try and get her to touch it.  Pretty sure if I don’t text her, I’ll be good.  No one will believe her, or 20 women like her, come to think of it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, zoonation said:

So, based on your required standard, you’d agree that many women could be sexually assaulted and not have the evidence necessary to convince you.  

No cameras in here? I’ll whip it out and try and get her to touch it.  Pretty sure if I don’t text her, I’ll be good.  No one will believe her, or 20 women like her, come to think of it.  

It could happen and that would be unfortunate, but “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”  It’s kind of the bedrock of our justice system. 
 

edit: Also stop acting like wanting to see the evidence = not believing women. 

Edited by bigmarc27
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bigmarc27 said:

It could happen and that would be unfortunate, but “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”  It’s kind of the bedrock of our justice system. 

Not sure what that principal has to do with your curious standard for required evidence in a case that will mostly be decided on credibility and circumstantial evidence. 

Study after study has shown that between 2-10% of sexual assault cases are falsely reported.  That number is significantly reduced further in cases where multiple women tell the same story of a pattern of abusive behaviour.   Explaining it away as they are all lying and out to get him, for whatever reason, borders on conspiracy theory.   

so, whether there are text messages between them, or other slam dunk physical evidence, is not and will likely Not be the applicable evidentiary threshold.  Nor should it be.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, zoonation said:

Not sure what that principal has to do with your curious standard for required evidence in a case that will mostly be decided on credibility and circumstantial evidence. 

Study after study has shown that between 2-10% of sexual assault cases are falsely reported.  That number is significantly reduced further in cases where multiple women tell the same story of a pattern of abusive behaviour.   Explaining it away as they are all lying and out to get him, for whatever reason, borders on conspiracy theory.   

so, whether there are text messages between them, or other slam dunk physical evidence, is not and will likely Not be the applicable evidentiary threshold.  Nor should it be.  

Please find where I said or even remotely implied “Explaining it away as they are all lying and out to get him, for whatever reason, borders on conspiracy theory.”  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, bigmarc27 said:

Please find where I said or even remotely implied “Explaining it away as they are all lying and out to get him, for whatever reason, borders on conspiracy theory.”  

Not saying you said that.  Was making a wider point.  Meant no offence.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One interesting thing about Watson's defense that it was consensual is that his own defense has probably cost him more money than he will lose in these cases.  He's lost tens of millions in endorsement money with his admission that he behaves like this, even if it is ruled consensual.  No company is going to want him to represent them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, RC94 said:

One interesting thing about Watson's defense that it was consensual is that his own defense has probably cost him more money than he will lose in these cases.  He's lost tens of millions in endorsement money with his admission that he behaves like this, even if it is ruled consensual.  No company is going to want him to represent them.

If he never plays again he wont make that money anyway

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, RC94 said:

One interesting thing about Watson's defense that it was consensual is that his own defense has probably cost him more money than he will lose in these cases.  He's lost tens of millions in endorsement money with his admission that he behaves like this, even if it is ruled consensual.  No company is going to want him to represent them.

Is this turns out to be overblown and no Criminal charges are ever filed, and he’s only suspended for six games or eight games for “conduct unbecoming“, there will be 20+ teams lined up to have him as their starting quarterback. And inside of a year this will get flushed down everyone’s memory holes and Watson will get plenty of endorsements.

i’m not saying it’s good and I’m not saying it’s right… I’m just saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Is this turns out to be overblown and no Criminal charges are ever filed, and he’s only suspended for six games or eight games for “conduct unbecoming“, there will be 20+ teams lined up to have him as their starting quarterback. And inside of a year this will get flushed down everyone’s memory holes and Watson will get plenty of endorsements.

i’m not saying it’s good and I’m not saying it’s right… I’m just saying.

I have no doubt he will be able to continue his career as a QB if that happens, but I really doubt anyone is going to give him a lot of money to represent their company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, RC94 said:

One interesting thing about Watson's defense that it was consensual is that his own defense has probably cost him more money than he will lose in these cases.  He's lost tens of millions in endorsement money with his admission that he behaves like this, even if it is ruled consensual.  No company is going to want him to represent them.

Pride comes before the fall 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RC94 said:

I have no doubt he will be able to continue his career as a QB if that happens, but I really doubt anyone is going to give him a lot of money to represent their company.

Vick got endorsements when he made his comeback. The man strangled & electrocuted dogs. 

If he can get endorsements, captain handjob will get endorsements. 

Maybe it’ll be from a hand lotion or sex lube company, but he will get endorsements. 

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hot Sauce Guy said:

Vick got endorsements when he made his comeback. The man strangled & electrocuted dogs. 

If he can get endorsements, captain handjob will get endorsements. 

Maybe it’ll be from a hand lotion or sex lube company, but he will get endorsements. 

IIRC Vick only an endorsement from small company who thought that any publicity is good publicity.  He never made any serious money from it again and I'm sure his representation lost the company customers.  Watson's days of representing companies like Nike where he can make the millions are over.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RC94 said:

IIRC Vick only an endorsement from small company who thought that any publicity is good publicity.  He never made any serious money from it again and I'm sure his representation lost the company customers.  Watson's days of representing companies like Nike where he can make the millions are over.

Vick was also a lot older and only played for a short while. Watson is 25. If this blows over he’ll have million dollar endorsements by the time he’s 27. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the damage is already pretty significant and unrecoverable from a public perception perspective.  Look at how many people call Tyreek Hill a PoS child abuser still even though we have evidence it was not true. 

I wonder how many people to this day would say the Duke lacrosse kids are guilty? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

unrecoverable? 

it's sport... ppl really dont care as much as we pretend they do. sure, sponsors might shy away, but he'll still make 200M+ over his nfl career

the only ppl who will "care" in the longrun, are social media trolls.

Edited by Soulfly3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kittenmittens said:

I think the damage is already pretty significant and unrecoverable from a public perception perspective.  Look at how many people call Tyreek Hill a PoS child abuser still even though we have evidence it was not true. 

you overestimate people’s memory holes. People in the FF world remember Tyreek’s off-field issues. 

Casual observers have completely forgotten about it. 

All that will be relevant here is if it goes to trial and/or has a criminal charge associated with it. If not, this too shall fade away like Tiger Woods 1,274 affairs. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Soulfly3 said:

unrecoverable? 

it's sport... ppl really dont care as much as we pretend they do. sure, sponsors might shy away, but he'll still make 200M+ over his nfl career

the only ppl who will "care" in the longrun, are social media trolls.

Just mean it's never going back to where it was, regardless of how it goes from here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I follow some working NFL scout on twitter(who is anonymous but Jim Nagy knows him and he's legit) who in a since deleted tweet last night said that the Texans had been aware of this behavior from Watson and that he heard that a friend of the owner tipped off the attorney after Watson made his trade request.

He also said that he heard Buzbee's plan was to just inundate Watson with so many civil lawsuits that it was just an attempt to avalanche him and get him to settle. This scout is in no way saying Watson did nothing, he point blank said Watson is going to miss at least some time and potentially the whole season depending on how things go, but he also said based on what he heard we should believe nothing Buzbee says unless we see proof.

Again he deleted the main tweet last night alluding to the owner's friend tipping off Buzbee. He did leave a new one about an hour ago saying Watson was for sure hooking up with women, but a "randy" is what he referred to him and not a rapist. He said based on word going around Watson was a little dumb and being dragged through crap because of stupidity but he isn't likely a rapist.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Thinking 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, menobrown said:

I follow some working NFL scout on twitter(who is anonymous but Jim Nagy knows him and he's legit) who in a since deleted tweet last night said that the Texans had been aware of this behavior from Watson and that he heard that a friend of the owner tipped off the attorney after Watson made his trade request.

He also said that he heard Buzbee's plan was to just inundate Watson with so many civil lawsuits that it was just an attempt to avalanche him and get him to settle. This scout is in no way saying Watson did nothing, he point blank said Watson is going to miss at least some time and potentially the whole season depending on how things go, but he also said based on what he heard we should believe nothing Buzbee says unless we see proof.

Again he deleted the main tweet last night alluding to the owner's friend tipping off Buzbee. He did leave a new one about an hour ago saying Watson was for sure hooking up with women, but a "randy" is what he referred to him and not a rapist. He said based on word going around Watson was a little dumb and being dragged through crap because of stupidity but he isn't likely a rapist.

 

This tracks with the general football malpractice going on in Houston.  What a complete disaster.  These people are morons. 

The Buzbee angle is clear also.  That's why he is threatening to involve police but not actually do it.  It's the posturing to get Watson to settle. 

Watson being dumb also tracks.  Talk about at best a very dumb situation he is mired in. 

Edited by kittenmittens
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, kittenmittens said:

This tracks with the general football malpractice going on in Houston.  What a complete disaster.  These people are morons. 

The Buzbee angle is clear also.  That's why he is threatening to involve police but not actually do it.  It's the posturing to get Watson to settle. 

Watson being dumb also tracks.  Talk about at best a very dumb situation he is mired in. 

if any of that can be proven (e.g. the collusion between owner / attorney / timing) then regardless that Watson did dumb & morally questionable things, he’d have a pretty good case against the Texans, ownership & the attorney. 

Hypothetically speaking. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

he’d have a pretty good case against the Texans, ownership & the attorney. 

Hypothetically speaking. 

I'm wondering about this quite a bit.  I'm too dumb to understand the nuances of whether the lawyer has enough he can hide behind.  If it ends up being a stretch, and Watson sues for defamation, I don't know how much of the story would never come out because of attorney client privilege 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/26/2021 at 1:30 PM, Soulfly3 said:

what's odd? Wasnt buzbee supposed to deliver the docs to the police 5 days ago? (Monday)

His own words, by the way. 

So, what about the take is odd, exactly?

Why does it matter if he goes to the cops?  Does that make Watson less guilty?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, kittenmittens said:

I'm wondering about this quite a bit.  I'm too dumb to understand the nuances of whether the lawyer has enough he can hide behind.  If it ends up being a stretch, and Watson sues for defamation, I don't know how much of the story would never come out because of attorney client privilege 

So what I know:

it wouldn’t be defamation because the things alleged by the attorney were technically true (in this hypothetical, of the situation described above).

But colluding with owners/team harmed Watson’s image by timing the release of information until it could do the most damage is almost certainly actionable. 

An attorney would have to put it into legal terms for us, but from my memory of tort law, there’s absolutely economic & repetitional harm done to Watson, coordinated between team/owners & this attorney.

that’s purely in this hypothetical scenario where no criminal charges are ever filed & some/all women recant or drop their civil suits. 

Edited by Hot Sauce Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

if any of that can be proven (e.g. the collusion between owner / attorney / timing) then regardless that Watson did dumb & morally questionable things, he’d have a pretty good case against the Texans, ownership & the attorney. 

Hypothetically speaking. 

It will be a he said/she said, which is impossible to prove, no?  

Not unlike each of the masseuse's claims against, Watson.  Which makes all these demands for criminal complaints a bit naive.  These DA's don't just file charges so that these alleged victims can prove something to a bunch of dudes on the internet predisposed to disbelieve every woman who accuses a famous man.  (Not directing this at you, Hot Sauce, obvi).

It makes me smile thinking about a defamation case Watson might file. I can imagine Buzbe now: "Yer, honor, I'd like to call up these 14 women to the stand, one after another...."  LOL

Yeah, Watson won't be filing that case anytime soon.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Faust changed the title to QB Deshaun Watson - present at the start of Texans training camp.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...