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!

     

Houston police opening investigation on Deshaun Watson


TheSpecialJuan
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:
1 hour ago, SizzleBuzz said:

He probably paid them off.  

Probably as much as the Texans paid off those women claiming wrongdoing just to get back at Watson for wanting to leave Houston. 

Exactly. 

The odds of either of those scenarios having actually taken place is zero percent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Moo Daeng said:

That's as relevant as finding a list of people who haven't been murdered. It means zero to those who are victims.

If it didn't have any relevancy as you suggest, then I doubt his lawyer would be mentioning it. One thing for sure that does matter is the character of Watson and the character of the accuser to determine who the victim really is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, top dawg said:

If it didn't have any relevancy as you suggest, then I doubt his lawyer would be mentioning it. One thing for sure that does matter is the character of Watson and the character of the accuser to determine who the victim really is.

Come one, use your brain. That goes literally nothing to refute any claims. It's PR

Edited by Moo Daeng
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, top dawg said:

There is a term: Think like a lawyer! I'm thinking that you've never heard of it, but, that's OK, most haven't!

This isn't a case of "thinking like a lawyer" because per Florio (who was a lawyer) statements like this are inadmissible in court.

Plus common sense would tell you that even a hundred people saying "well, he didn't rape / murder / attack me" doesn't qualify as evidence that a defendant didn't do it to one.

This is purely for PR, but it also kind of backfired.

Florio pointed out that Watson being able to so easily produce the names of 18 masseuses who haven't accused him of anything undermines his claim that he has no idea who the others are. That besides raising the question "why does he need so many different masseuses".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, t96 said:

I think 1 claimed he forced a BJ, but the others were more along the lines of indecent exposure/harassment rather than assault/rape. Either way not good if true...

Actually at least three women have claimed that, and it might now be four.

3 hours ago, MHS831 said:

The police are investigating this due to public pressure.  

Not really. Per the HPD statement, this is in response to an accuser filing a complaint with them.

What I haven't seen yet is whether the complaint is from one of the ones already working with Buzbee, the one working with a different lawyer, or somebody entirely new (that'd bring the number of accusers to 26 if that's the case).

Buzbee did say there are going to be more complaints filed, some with HPD and some with other agencies. The official lawsuits filed count is now 22.

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

10 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

This isn't a case of "thinking like a lawyer" because per Florio (who was a lawyer) statements like this are inadmissible in court.

Plus common sense would tell you that even a hundred people saying "well, he didn't rape / murder / attack me" doesn't qualify as evidence that a defendant didn't do it to one.

This is purely for PR, but it also kind of backfired.

Florio pointed out that Watson being able to so easily produce the names of 18 masseuses who haven't accused him of anything undermines his claim that he has no idea who the others are. That besides raising the question "why does he need so many different masseuses".

Public opinion does indeed have an effect upon court cases, regardless of what a lawyer intimates (though it doesn't have any official legal capacity). I don't know what you're listening to, but Florio was adamant that Watson was/is losing in the court of public opinion. He was screaming for Watson's party to say something as Watson was getting already getting killed in public opinion. Now they have, and I think it's a little disingenuous to say that it's backfired. 

I don't know when Watson or Hardin said that Watson has "no idea who the others are". Obviously they have some idea as to who some of them are, but they're really still precluded from taking any steps to contact them in any official (or practical) capacity in order to defend Watson at this point from a legal perspective. But, if this thing ever actually goes to trial, that's when these  anonymous women, for legal purposes, will become known to the defense, and the defense will legally be able to cross-examine them. 

The "why so many masseuses" thing is not a legal theory.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ncstatekwi said:

Have any of y’all looked up masseuse on IG?!?!? Holy smokes.... 🧐

No, but I can imagine. I never knew that there were so many masseuses (wink wink) in the world! IG seems like an interesting platform to be advertising your massage services, but what do I know?! 🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, top dawg said:

If it didn't have any relevancy as you suggest, then I doubt his lawyer would be mentioning it. One thing for sure that does matter is the character of Watson and the character of the accuser to determine who the victim really is.

What it does is that it counters the sexual predator narrative. It also puts Buzbee on notice that in every one of those court cases there will be at least eighteen women in the same industry as the accuser testifying for Watson.

Now if to anyone who believes that the number of women accusing Watson of inappropriate behavior is important, then the number of women who have been in similar or identical intimate environments, who are vouching for his character and behavior, should hold the same weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, top dawg said:

Public opinion does indeed have an effect upon court cases, regardless of what a lawyer intimates (though it doesn't have any official legal capacity). I don't know what you're listening to, but Florio was adamant that Watson was/is losing in the court of public opinion. He was screaming for Watson's party to say something as Watson was getting already getting killed in public opinion. Now they have, and I think it's a little disingenuous to say that it's backfired. 

I don't know when Watson or Hardin said that Watson has "no idea who the others are". Obviously they have some idea as to who some of them are, but they're really still precluded from taking any steps to contact them in any official (or practical) capacity in order to defend Watson at this point from a legal perspective. But, if this thing ever actually goes to trial, that's when these  anonymous women, for legal purposes, will become known to the defense, and the defense will legally be able to cross-examine them. 

The "why so many masseuses" thing is not a legal theory.

It was Florio who pointed out that it backfired.

Hardin has been saying from the beginning that Watson had no idea who was accusing him. It was already pretty obvious that was bullsh-t. This makes it more so.

Admitting that Watson had a sexual encounter with one of his masseuses probably didn't help either, even with the proviso that it was consensual.

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
    • Sanders is with Tom Brady brand and that's his mentor. The Raiders owner was with Sanders taking pics at a Vegas game together.   It doesn't take much to connect the dots that Vegas will be interested in Sanders as their franchise QB. Oh yeah and guess who hasa small ownership stake in the Raiders Tom Brady.   I guess this is just another made up Madden idea by me huh?
×
×
  • Create New...