ET80 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 1 hour ago, Tk3 said: Its almost 3 PM and there have been no league-changing transactions yet today I don't understand... Mahomes to Washington confirmed…? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superman(DH23) Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 25 minutes ago, ET80 said: ??? Source? The source is their own afadvits, with the exception of the former gf, they all stated Watson did not force himself on them (ie no assault) their claim revolves around they felt intimidated due to the power discrepancy. The first 4 cases that came out had no sexual contact whatsoever instead their affidavits basically said that Watson asked for sexual favors they said no and he was like "cool" and that was it. To act like all 22 cases make the same claim is foolhardy their claims run the gambit of "Deshaun asked me to massage his groin, to Deshaun forced me to perform sex acts (the former GF who may have been attempting to extort him). Deshaun is probably guilty of solicitation, we all know this. This is truly the most likely scenario based on everything we know. Again the morality of it is debatable bit people up in here calling him a sexual predator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superman(DH23) Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 5 minutes ago, MWil23 said: People who don’t understand the basic difference between civil and criminal cases amuse and infuriate me Civil cases still have an evidentiary standard which is HIGHER than the evidentiary standard for a criminal indictment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superman(DH23) Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 46 minutes ago, iloxygenil said: Allegedly That link is for you, your view means literally nothing when it comes to facts and justice. You cannot state opinion and claim fact, I don't care what generation you're a part of and what sort of relative truth you subscribe, there is absolute truth and until proven otherwise DW is an innocent man. Do I believe he did nothing wrong? Nope, we all do wrong, every single day of our lives. Do I know if DW did anything with any of these women? Nope, but I can presume there was ample opportunity at minimum. Do I believe it's equally as likely there was a consensually sexual act that was paid for thus making it illegal as another me too movement happening? Yep, absolutely I do. If the facts are that DW did engage in illegal activity then he should be punished. Equally as someone who isn't a multi-millionaire and suspensions / bans should be put in place that suit the crime. If not, then shame on the women who are harming other victims who need proper justice for the crimes that have been inflicted on them by lying and trying to get in on a cash grab. This is bigger than football it just so happens to involve a football player so it's getting more attention. Women and men who are victims of sex crimes need to be set free and be able to speak their voice and let the truth come out so there can be an end to this. But as long as someone is out there looking for a payday screaming these allegations without being able to back it up, that is selfish and harmful to those who do need and deserve help. You out here parading as if you know the truth without even the slightest idea of what actually happened on the nights in question, without ever sitting in court and hearing the evidence; makes you part of the problem. Justice isn't played out on internet forums by "White Knights." Justice is handled by the Judicial System. While it doesn't always get it right, at least there are parameters that go beyond your feelings. (which aren't valid when it comes to truth) You're just as irresponsible as these "journalists" who are all just trying to be the first to tweet/post/break a story without thoroughly vetting the scenario and knowing the truth. Reports based on speculation are irresponsible unless noted as such. Well said sir Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 23 minutes ago, Superman(DH23) said: The source is their own afadvits, with the exception of the former gf, they all stated Watson did not force himself on them (ie no assault) their claim revolves around they felt intimidated due to the power discrepancy. This is different than saying there was consent. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agarcia34 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 He told the Browns no and then they were like we will full guarantee your contract. Still amazed by 230 fully guaranteed. MLB type of contract Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayRaider Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 2 minutes ago, agarcia34 said: He told the Browns no and then they were like we will full guarantee your contract. Still amazed by 230 fully guaranteed. MLB type of contract Yeah I think Watson was a hair from being an Atlanta Falcon… better chance to win, and would of brought his own choice of weapons. He would of dominated that division for the next 5-6 years after Brady retires. He chose $. And I don’t blame him. 230 fully guaranteed? Like you said, that’s unheard of in the NFL. That’s a baseball contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tk3 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 We really have posters who believe "agreeing to something because they felt intimidated" is the same as "consent"? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mesa_Titan Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 3 minutes ago, Tk3 said: We really have posters who believe "agreeing to something because they felt intimidated" is the same as "consent"? Feeling intimidated isn't the same thing as actually being intimidated, though to be fair. From everything I've heard, nothing that he has been reported as saying is grounds for intimidation. You can't help how people feel based on whatever circumstances there may be, but how is the alleged intimidator supposed to know that when they aren't actually being intimidating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tk3 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 2 minutes ago, Mesa_Titan said: Feeling intimidated isn't the same thing as actually being intimidated, though to be fair. From everything I've heard, nothing that he has been reported as saying is grounds for intimidation. You can't help how people feel based on whatever circumstances there may be, but how is the alleged intimidator supposed to know that when they aren't actually being intimidating? By reading the room? I agree there is nuance between the sender of a message and the receiver of the message (this isn't just consent, but ANY form of communication). But it's up to the sender of the message to read the reactions of the receiver. That's how proper communication works, and that includes the concept of consent. If a substantial population of people feel intimidated but have not actually been intimidated then you need to reconsider what your definition of "actually being intimidated" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tk3 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 7 minutes ago, Mesa_Titan said: Feeling intimidated isn't the same thing as actually being intimidated, though to be fair. From everything I've heard, nothing that he has been reported as saying is grounds for intimidation. You can't help how people feel based on whatever circumstances there may be, but how is the alleged intimidator supposed to know that when they aren't actually being intimidating? I can meet you halfway on this point, that there can be a different between intent and reception But if people are repeatedly feeling intimidated by you, you can't just say "they are wrong, I never intimidated them". There's clearly something there that the person is doing that is causing a reaction to be duplicated a number of times 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammymvpknight Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 48 minutes ago, Superman(DH23) said: The source is their own afadvits, with the exception of the former gf, they all stated Watson did not force himself on them (ie no assault) their claim revolves around they felt intimidated due to the power discrepancy. The first 4 cases that came out had no sexual contact whatsoever instead their affidavits basically said that Watson asked for sexual favors they said no and he was like "cool" and that was it. To act like all 22 cases make the same claim is foolhardy their claims run the gambit of "Deshaun asked me to massage his groin, to Deshaun forced me to perform sex acts (the former GF who may have been attempting to extort him). Deshaun is probably guilty of solicitation, we all know this. This is truly the most likely scenario based on everything we know. Again the morality of it is debatable bit people up in here calling him a sexual predator. Someone rubbing their penis on someone’s hand is sexual assault. Just about every affidavit had that. I’m sorry but I can’t see how someone can read the claims and say that it’s just solicitation of prostitution. Masterbating in front of unwilling participants is also at minimum indecent exposure. That was in a ton of claims as well. If you think that all of the women made it up…fine. But if even one of these claims had truth…Watson committed at minimum indecent exposure if not sexual assault. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozzy Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 "Hardin (Watson's Lawyer) admitted that consensual sexual encounters sometimes occurred with massage therapists. Hardin insists, however, that he did not coerce the massage therapists or use his status as a celebrity to violate the ability of the massage therapists to provide consent." https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/04/09/rusty-hardin-admits-that-deshaun-watsons-massages-sometimes-resulted-in-consensual-sex/ Form another article: "experts say a civil suit is often a sexual assault victim’s best shot at justice." So they probably did not even press much on the criminal trail because that is not what they wanted anyway. Does not prove the dude is innocent. "When the woman objected, she alleges, Watson replied, "You can sit on it." She says she cut the massage short and that Watson said he would not pay her unless she signed a nondisclosure agreement. She says in her lawsuit that she signed the agreement and that Watson paid her $265 for a $65 session." The more information one gets the more odd it is. @Superman(DH23) If you are the legal expert here, say Watson was not famous and not a millionaire and did what he is accused of. He is most likely in jail after all of that right? Because he could not hire a great lawyer and there would be no desire for a civil suit because he does not have any money? What would happen? And the dude says no it was all consensual? Either way the consensual stuff, yeah prove that, good luck, it is not easy. Watson apparently has an absolutely gorgeous girl friend, and he has to pay massage therapist to give him pleasure from time to time because he is not getting any from his lady? Oh but that is just standard issue for athletes. Ok. Still no clue how it is not forced prostitution in some way, oh but the lady is fine with it 'apparently' so it is not illegal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 12 minutes ago, Tk3 said: I can meet you halfway on this point, that there can be a different between intent and reception But if people are repeatedly feeling intimidated by you, you can't just say "they are wrong, I never intimidated them". There's clearly something there that the person is doing that is causing a reaction to be duplicated a number of times My question on this - how does one interpret Watson’s intent/reception when he sends texts such as this to the alleged victims? It feels like he knew he crossed a line and is trying to cover himself. Would everyone agree - would somebody who felt they did nothing wrong/established consent send this text? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mesa_Titan Posted March 19, 2022 Share Posted March 19, 2022 1 minute ago, Tk3 said: I can meet you halfway on this point, that there can be a different between intent and reception But if people are repeatedly feeling intimidated by you, you can't just say "they are wrong, I never intimidated them". There's clearly something there that the person is doing that is causing a reaction to be duplicated a number of times I mean, that is assuming women repeatedly told him they felt intimidated. Without that, how do you know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts