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!

     

Go on record. Who still wants Watson?


Recommended Posts

Doubting women that come forward while also questioning why they didn’t come forward earlier... 

Can you imagine the public outcry if any of these women came forward and got the team’s star QB suspended when it happened? Aside from having expensive lawyers that could make their lives hell, the city could have quickly turned on them as sad as that sounds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ForJimmy said:

Doubting women that come forward while also questioning why they didn’t come forward earlier... 

Can you imagine the public outcry if any of these women came forward and got the team’s star QB suspended when it happened? Aside from having expensive lawyers that could make their lives hell, the city could have quickly turned on them as sad as that sounds.

They'd get death threats from internet dudes.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mr. Scot said:

And only those who follow your advice are believable, right?

Anybody here who knows someone that's actually been assaulted will tell you you that you absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Again, this is why I'm hoping you're young and just lacking in life experience, because a more mature person thinking like this would be pretty sad.

You seem to be confused. I am hoping you are young. This isn't rocket science. 

No one should claim someone is believable or not before seeing/hearing all the evidence. 

Then after hearing all the available evidence, can you form your own personal opinion on what happen. 

Which doesn't mean you are right or know what actually happen.

However, that doesn't change the fact when and how you report it will affect people's perceptions. 

I, like most, would be more predisposition, to believe someone who immediately goes to police with bruising and signs of sexual trauma vs someone who comes forward years later with a civil suit. 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Doubting women that come forward while also questioning why they didn’t come forward earlier... 

Can you imagine the public outcry if any of these women came forward and got the team’s star QB suspended when it happened? Aside from having expensive lawyers that could make their lives hell, the city could have quickly turned on them as sad as that sounds.

We are deep into cancel culture / metoo. These women would have been A OK had they came forward earlier to police. As that looks better than waiting and going civil. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Agent Blue said:

You seem to be confused. I am hoping you are young. This isn't rocket science. 

No one should claim someone is believable or not before seeing/hearing all the evidence. 

Then after hearing all the available evidence, can you form your own personal opinion on what happen. 

Which doesn't mean you are right or know what actually happen.

However, that doesn't change the fact when and how you report it will affect people's perceptions. 

I, like most, would be more predisposition, to believe someone who immediately goes to police with bruising and signs of sexual trauma vs someone who comes forward years later with a civil suit. 

Yeah...you know absolutely nothing about women.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you were there or there was video or audio evidence or a confession, no one should tell a alleged victim they are lying or tell the accused they are guilty. 

At best we can only have opinions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, jackson113 said:

Finger in the Ole Anus..😬

7BDB5E03-D970-49AC-84A6-66E91B757152.png

See I cringe when I read this, yuck. However, she stated that she would not entertain his sexual advances. He did not force it further, he did not go into her no-no square. Is this creepy? yes. Does Watson seemingly have issues? yes. Is this illegal? That is the question.

  • Pie 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, philit99 said:

See I cringe when I read this, yuck. However, she stated that she would not entertain his sexual advances. He did not force it further, he did not go into her no-no square. Is this creepy? yes. Does Watson seemingly have issues? yes. Is this illegal? That is the question.

Guess he wanted her to Philit... lol

  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Agent Blue said:

Unless you were there or there was video or audio evidence or a confession, no one should tell a alleged victim they are lying or tell the accused they are guilty. 

At best we can only have opinions. 

There is probably no dumber, more ill informed take available than "unless there's video, we can't be sure".

(ranks right up there with the CSI effect)

Edited by Mr. Scot
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, philit99 said:

See I cringe when I read this, yuck. However, she stated that she would not entertain his sexual advances. He did not force it further, he did not go into her no-no square. Is this creepy? yes. Does Watson seemingly have issues? yes. Is this illegal? That is the question.

Technically, what Jerry Richardson did isn't "illegal".

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Agent Blue said:

We are deep into cancel culture / metoo. These women would have been A OK had they came forward earlier to police. As that looks better than waiting and going civil. 

You could say the same about Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer and just about every rich person with power that has done things similar to what Watson is being accused of. None of those victims went to the police right away yet all 3 of these men are guilty. 25 accusers doesn’t look good and no team is interested in Watson until there is some more clarity. Please move on....

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mr. Scot said:

There is probably no dumber, more I'll informed take available than "unless there's video, we can't be sure".

(ranks right up there with the CSI effect)

Please inform us how you can be sure of sexual assault if 

1) You were not present to actually see or hear said incident. 

2) You have seen no video of said incident. 

3) You have heard no audio of said incident. 

4) You have seen or heard no confession of said incident. 

#goesandgrabspopcorn

  • Beer 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Agent Blue said:

Please inform us how you can be sure of sexual assault if 

1) You were not present to actually see or hear said incident. 

2) You have seen no video of said incident. 

3) You have heard no audio of said incident. 

4) You have seen or heard no confession of said incident. 

#goesandgrabspopcorn

I tend to believe 25 women telling essentially the same story

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mr. Scot said:

Technically, what Jerry Richardson did isn't "illegal".

Agreed. How much money did Richardson shell out for his creepy messages? Money sure seems to cure immortal statements and actions.

Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...