Jump to content

Deshaun Watson suspended 6 games


xianshino
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, caponine said:

I see what you’re saying but Buzbee’s statements and quotes over the last year and a half have been the opposite of what you said.

Watson allegedly wanted them to sign a NDA as part of the settlement according to Buzbee but they rejected that deal. I don’t see why now they would take decide to take a settlement. They already spoke out a huge number of the women did , so it wouldn’t make much sense at this point to take the deal unless both sides just want to move on. 

I'd bet they put a lot more money on the table than they had on there previously.  Enough money will induce anyone to sign an NDA.  Another option would be they took the NDA off the table.  "Fine, say what you want, but take the money and sign a release."  That seems less likely to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JDaveG said:

I'd bet they put a lot more money on the table than they had on there previously.  Enough money will induce anyone to sign an NDA.  Another option would be they took the NDA off the table.  "Fine, say what you want, but take the money and sign a release."  That seems less likely to me.

Yeah that would make sense Deshaun Watson’s first alleged victim wanted 100,000 in hush money. Deshaun’s legal team must not have liked that deal 
 

Altogether I do think you’re right , Enough money will make anyone sign that. Watson most likely had to pay north of 5 mil for all 24 women. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, caponine said:

Yeah that would make sense Deshaun Watson’s first alleged victim wanted 100,000 in hush money. Deshaun’s legal team must not have liked that deal 
 

Altogether I do think you’re right , Enough money will make anyone sign that. Watson most likely had to pay north of 5 mil for all 24 women. 

I don't know about all 24, but I bet the settlements with the "final four" as it were ended up being 7 figures each.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

I'd bet they put a lot more money on the table than they had on there previously.  Enough money will induce anyone to sign an NDA.  Another option would be they took the NDA off the table.  "Fine, say what you want, but take the money and sign a release."  That seems less likely to me.

I can’t fathom Watson settling without insisting on a confidentiality provision in every case. He just signed a $230 million guaranteed deal, and these cases were causing further issues with the discipline process. I’ve got to imagine he put up a lot more money on the table. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Mr. Hoopah! said:

I can’t fathom Watson settling without insisting on a confidentiality provision in every case. He just signed a $230 million guaranteed deal, and these cases were causing further issues with the discipline process. I’ve got to imagine he put up a lot more money on the table. 

Agree.  And even if he did waive an NDA as to substance, I guarantee you the amounts would be covered by a confidentiality agreement.  If for no other reason than to stop the floodgates of accusations.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an international fan, I consider this an outright embarrassment and a backward step for a league that was supposed to be protecting women's rights. 

If the NFL accepts this recommendation, then they need to hire Ray Rice as assistant commissioner, refund the Dallas Cowboys for the cheerleader settlement, call off the investigation of Dan Snyder... 

Keep the same energy and be consistent. Just come out and say what you feel, "women don't matter if you can throw the football" 

Also extremely disappointed in the NFLPA... Are these the battles you flex your muscles to fight? 

Edited by ramonezy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stizz said:

what? I'm pointing out what the NFL pushed for. Not defending Watson or his actions.

You are the biggest clown on this board and was supposed to be gone when Ryan left and here you are crawling back like the dirty weasel you are.

Hahaha I love this rivalry honestly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Komic said:

An absolute joke. 

"thats about 6 games worth of sexual assault based on the evidence we see."

That's about a 15 min quarter for each woman he assaulted... (the punchline).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I won't lie.  If we had landed Watson, I would be looking forward to week 7 on the calendar.   That said, I am happy we did not need to deal with all the drama and more relevant to football, I am glad we don't have a fully guaranteed $230 mill noose around the team's neck.   That contract is going to hurt them down the road. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr. Hoopah! said:

If the Judge has to put in writing that you can only use team masseuses for the rest of your career, you should probably be suspended for more than 6 games 

 

You can read the entire report here.  Notably, this part is in her findings:

"I find this sufficient circumstantial evidence to support the NFL’s contention not only that contact occurred, but that Mr. Watson was aware that contact probably would occur, and that Mr. Watson had a sexual purpose – not  just a therapeutic purpose – in making these arrangements with these particular therapists."

https://www.wkyc.com/article/sports/nfl/browns/deshaun-watson-6-game-suspension-judge-sue-l-robinsons-full-ruling/95-af65007a-951d-45ce-9766-cc36577a2183

She found this violated the "sexual assault" charge, but she also found his conduct violated the "genuine danger to the safety or well-being of another person" charge AND the "conduct detrimental to the NFL" charge.  In other words, she found expressly that Deshaun Watson violated 3 different portions of the personal conduct policy.

So she basically said "you can't discipline for more time than you have in the past without fair notice to the players."  The NFL limited its case to 5 allegations.  I wonder if they aren't going to bring in more now, or in the event more women come forward, use them to get a more significant punishment.

I think it's silly personally.  She said directly that Watson's conduct is more egregious than any other "first offender, non-violent" player in history.  Leaving aside my quibble with her too-narrow definitions of "violence" and "force" in this report, I don't think multiple offenses ought to be treated as "first offender."  He offended four times.  If this was a court of law, and he was tried on each charge separately, he wouldn't get first offender treatment for all four.  I guess I fail to understand why he should in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

You can read the entire report here.  Notably, this part is in her findings:

"I find this sufficient circumstantial evidence to support the NFL’s contention not only that contact occurred, but that Mr. Watson was aware that contact probably would occur, and that Mr. Watson had a sexual purpose – not  just a therapeutic purpose – in making these arrangements with these particular therapists."

https://www.wkyc.com/article/sports/nfl/browns/deshaun-watson-6-game-suspension-judge-sue-l-robinsons-full-ruling/95-af65007a-951d-45ce-9766-cc36577a2183

She found this violated the "sexual assault" charge, but she also found his conduct violated the "genuine danger to the safety or well-being of another person" charge AND the "conduct detrimental to the NFL" charge.  In other words, she found expressly that Deshaun Watson violated 3 different portions of the personal conduct policy.

So she basically said "you can't discipline for more time than you have in the past without fair notice to the players."  The NFL limited its case to 5 allegations.  I wonder if they aren't going to bring in more now, or in the event more women come forward, use them to get a more significant punishment.

I think it's silly personally.  She said directly that Watson's conduct is more egregious than any other "first offender, non-violent" player in history.  Leaving aside my quibble with her too-narrow definitions of "violence" and "force" in this report, I don't think multiple offenses ought to be treated as "first offender."  He offended four times.  If this was a court of law, and he was tried on each charge separately, he wouldn't get first offender treatment for all four.  I guess I fail to understand why he should in this case.

Frankly her reasoning is offensive. She’s forcing the NFL to redefine its punishment policies but letting him off of the hook because he “didn’t have notice” that you’re not supposed to put your ***** on women without their consent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mr. Hoopah! said:

Frankly her reasoning is offensive. She’s forcing the NFL to redefine its punishment policies but letting him off of the hook because he “didn’t have notice” that you’re not supposed to put your ***** on women without their consent. 

Oh, it's worse than that.  It's "you know you aren't supposed to put your ***** on women without their consent, but the NFL should have told you they are going to suspend you more than 6 games as long as it's your first time and it didn't leave a mark."

It should hereafter be known as the "Mushroom Stamp Rule."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JDaveG said:

Oh, it's worse than that.  It's "you know you aren't supposed to put your ***** on women without their consent, but the NFL should have told you they are going to suspend you more than 6 games as long as it's your first time and it didn't leave a mark."

It should hereafter be known as the "Mushroom Stamp Rule."

“They were supposed to tell you they could suspend you for 8 games for a Chicago Sunroof!”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mr. Hoopah! said:

“They were supposed to tell you they could suspend you for 8 games for a Chicago Sunroof!”

"Now, this massage therapist drove... And this will give you an idea of exactly what kind of a d-bag this lady is... Drove a white pearlescent BMW 7 series with white leather interior. [Chuckles] So, I saw that thing, and I had... I'd had a few, like I said. And, uh... I climbed up top, and I may have... touched my *****, uh, through the sunroof. Not my finest hour... I'll grant you that. But that's what a Chicago sunroof is. Now you know. [Chuckles] It's a real thing. I didn't make it up. I'm not the first person to do it. There's a name for it."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think this whole thing was a shakedown.  I think a lot of people do not understand how some of these social media massage “therapists” work.  No one should believe he flew in attractive inexperienced therapists for medical reasons. By anyone I include the therapists.

This isn’t that different from a lawyer going to a strip club and finding out a famous person goes to VIP a lot and starts interviewing the girl and asking if the guy had touched them or asked about sex in the VIP room suggesting they could get money if they said yes. 
 

I strongly suspect what he did was normal and didn’t surprise the girls.  A lawyer just put in their head that in the Metoo era it would be easy to shake him down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...