Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Deshaun Allegations detailed (not good)


Mills
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, mav1234 said:

Burden of proof is also different in civil vs criminal court.  It does help Watson a little if the police decline to pursue this, but it doesn't mean that he would be "cleared" in civil court 

that has always struck me as wrong...you can be found not guilty & still be ruined financially

if not criminally negligent, civil cases should not happen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Monrowed said:

The real issue is that the lawyer went on social media fishing for evidence. The general rule is that you do not accuse someone of a crime then go get evidence.

Usually, the police have an instance of a crime and gather evidence to support a charge that would lead to a conviction. In this case, it is the opposite, hence that this is the reason that it is being pursued as a civil matter.

It seems that the lawyer is submitting information to the police in an effort to legitimize the civil complaints. I suspect that if Deshaun is not brought in for questioning and charged within the next week to ten days, then the evidence is weak and would not meet the criteria for a conviction in court.

There’s always one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Monrowed said:

Oh really dude? In criminal court you need evidence of an actual crime or witnesses to a crime. As I said before, only in civil court would a lack of evidence lead to an unfavorable judgment. 

Sorry dude, but the suggestion that if this doesn't go to criminal court nobody's going to care is completely off the mark.

The allegations that have been made here are pretty serious, and the notion that a team in this day and age would just sweep them under the rug is just not credible.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Sorry dude, but the suggestion that if this doesn't go to criminal court nobody's going to care is completely off the mark.

The allegations that have been made here are pretty serious, and the notion that a team in this day and age would just sweep them under the rug is just not credible.

Pre Ray Rice, Maybe

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Yeah...it doesn't work that way.

Courts don't say "well if there's no video, you can't prove it", not even civil ones.

I was speaking on criminal cases. In civil cases there is not the burden of proof, but the believability of the accusation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Monrowed said:

I was speaking on criminal cases. In civil cases there is not the burden of proof, but the believability of the accusation.

Even in criminal cases, nobody says "well if there isn't video, there's no evidence". That'd be an absolutely ridiculous standard for courts to follow.

And no, it isn't true in civil cases either. Not should it be.

Edited by Mr. Scot
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NAS said:

Let me get this straight, you get assaulted and you go back for some more?  Yeah, that's believable 

Okay sure but why the hell is Watson touching women with his dick tht told him no before or trying to kiss them? Weird poo all over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NAS said:

Let me get this straight, you get assaulted and you go back for some more?  Yeah, that's believable 

Agree that's odd, but we don't know the details.

If he did something minor and then apologized, but did something worse the second time, that's a reasonable story.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mav1234 said:

Okay sure but why the hell is Watson touching women with his dick tht told him no before or trying to kiss them? Weird poo all over.

I believe these are 'escorts' looking for a payday

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Scott12345 said:

if not criminally negligent, civil cases should not happen

Civil courts are where non-criminal claims between individual parties are adjudicated.  That's why Civil courts exists, to try non-criminal code claims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, NAS said:

I believe these are 'escorts' looking for a payday

Again, some of the women involved in this story are state licensed massage therapists. As was pointed out, that's not an easy thing to become. And if it were true, that would be a pretty easy thing to figure out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...