Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Sexual Assault Suits Against Watson

thunderkyss said:
Like Cosby or OJ?

My point is there is more than accusations. There’s a lot of corroborating testimony. The question isn’t if he’s guilty, it’s what is he guilty of.
Click to expand...

…..just got this gut feeling that there are far, far, far more guys that were or are in prison and/or on death row that got there by accusations and false testimony than guys that got off like Cosby and OJ.

Oh, the question is if he’s guilty. No court has found him guilty to date.
 
OptimisticTexan said:
Oh, the question is if he’s guilty. No court has found him guilty to date.
Click to expand...

What happened happened. The court is only going to say whether the prosecution can prove it or not.

You're right, I don't know what happened. But from all the extra stories that have come out, tweets & texts that we've seen, corroborating testimonies of peoples involved.... something happened. Something that shouldn't have.
 
I’m starting to wonder if the DA is slow rolling this until after the trade deadline. If he gets moved, that may very well make it easier to not act versus him still being a part of the local team and scene.
 
thunderkyss said:
What happened happened. The court is only going to say whether the prosecution can prove it or not.

You're right, I don't know what happened. But from all the extra stories that have come out, tweets & texts that we've seen, corroborating testimonies of peoples involved.... something happened. Something that shouldn't have.
Click to expand...
To be honest how can you say the bolded. :crazy:
 
thunderkyss said:
Do we think Watson has evolved? Why is this here
Click to expand...
I wasn't going to wade into this. But........That story is about using social media to lure victims and then using a deadly weapon to kidnap, rob and physically assault them.

Are we now considering Watson's penis a deadly weapon? If that's the case, the Texans need to have him suit up and put him on the OL.
 
Last edited:
thunderkyss said:
Do we think Watson has evolved? Why is this here
Click to expand...
Earl34 said:
I wasn't going to wade into this. But........That story is about using social media to lure victims and then using a deadly weapon to kidnap, rob and physically assault them.

Are we now considering Watson's penis a deadly weapon? If that's the case, the Texans need to have him suit up and put him on the OL.
Click to expand...


The reason that case is Federal is that they used the internet to lure their victims.

Same reason the Feds are involved in Watson's case ....
 
Corrosion said:
The reason that case is Federal is that they used the internet to lure their victims.

Same reason the Feds are involved in Watson's case ....
Click to expand...
That’s fine if that’s the reason the Feds are involved but that’s not how you presented it. You made it sound like Watson was well on his way to the pen because that’s what happened to Grinder dude.

The dude in your story held people at gun point and stole money from them. He was going down whether it became Federal or not. Absolutely nothing to do with what is going on with Watson.

You know, I see the Gruden thread got shut down with a mod saying they’d add relevant information when/if needed. Maybe the same thing needs to be done to this thread.
 
Speedy said:
That’s fine if that’s the reason the Feds are involved but that’s not how you presented it. You made it sound like Watson was well on his way to the pen because that’s what happened to Grinder dude.

The dude in your story held people at gun point and stole money from them. He was going down whether it became Federal or not. Absolutely nothing to do with what is going on with Watson.

You know, I see the Gruden thread got shut down with a mod saying they’d add relevant information when/if needed. Maybe the same thing needs to be done to this thread.
Click to expand...

Seconded.

:coffee:
 
KoolAid Sipper said:
To be honest how can you say the bolded. :crazy:
Click to expand...
The point is the court doesn't decide whether Watson is guilty or not. If he did it he's guilty. If he did not, he is not.

The court will only determine if the prosecution can prove he is guilty.

As the Cosby case clearly demonstrated. Without Cosby's testimony they could not prove the truth. But it's still true. Even though they could not convict him.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
By admitting consensual sex occurred Watson’s team destroyed their own claim that it was first just massages
Click to expand...
Not at all. I could go to church meet a woman, develop a relationship & consumate that relationship. That doesn't mean I go to church so I could consummate a relationship with women.

Watson admitted to consensual sex, but provided no time line. For all we know that consensual sex was not even on the same day as the massage session.
 
Corrosion said:
The reason that case is Federal is that they used the internet to lure their victims.

Same reason the Feds are involved in Watson's case ....
Click to expand...
From the article they mentioned it was being treated as a hate crime. Which made it federal. I didn't see mention of internet in reference to the federal charge.

Jenkins pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit hate crimes, kidnapping, carjacking, one count of use a firearm in relation to a crime of violence and one hate crime count
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
thunderkyss said:
Not at all. I could go to church meet a woman, develop a relationship & consumate that relationship. That doesn't mean I go to church so I could consummate a relationship with women.

Watson admitted to consensual sex, but provided no time line. For all we know that consensual sex was not even on the same day as the massage session.
Click to expand...
Exactly. To add to your point. Watson's team could bring in professional massage therapists who will claim that during a massage, many clients get aroused. So, if Watson's team claim that arousal sometimes led to consensual sex, how does it "destroy their claim of just massages"?
 
Speedy said:
You know, I see the Gruden thread got shut down with a mod saying they’d add relevant information when/if needed. Maybe the same thing needs to be done to this thread.
Click to expand...

It's been discussed and considered, but the inherent problem is that this is a Texans forum and Watson is still a Texan and the subject would bleed over to other threads more than it does now.

At least this thread keeps most of it here, where folks can decide to read or not, and we have a little more control over potential flame wars and trolls.

My own take is that we'd never talk about Watson ever again on this forum and if his name is mentioned the system would replace it with "JACKASS" instead, but I'm kinda' hardcore that way and honestly just ready for the entire subject to die and be buried deep in the Mariana Trench.
 
Double Barrel said:
It's been discussed and considered, but the inherent problem is that this is a Texans forum and Watson is still a Texan and the subject would bleed over to other threads more than it does now.

At least this thread keeps most of it here, where folks can decide to read or not, and we have a little more control over potential flame wars and trolls.

My own take is that we'd never talk about Watson ever again on this forum and if his name is mentioned the system would replace it with "JACKASS" instead, but I'm kinda' hardcore that way and honestly just ready for the entire subject to die and be buried deep in the Mariana Trench.
Click to expand...
Sure he's still a Texan, but the 1st 4 words describing this Texans forum are "Football talk only please". This definitely isn't football talk. If a current Texans player was out doing political rallies and spewing his political opinions that were making the headlines, would we be able to talk about that? I'm guessing with the current landscape around here the answer would be no.

I get all the trade specualtion talk, at least that's still football related, but the stuff in this thread isn't. If you're going to shut down a Gruden thread in a football forum, then by the same token, keeping this thread open, at least in this section, doesn't make much sense.
 
Speedy said:
Sure he's still a Texan, but the 1st 4 words describing this Texans forum are "Football talk only please". This definitely isn't football talk. If a current Texans player was out doing political rallies and spewing his political opinions that were making the headlines, would we be able to talk about that? I'm guessing with the current landscape around here the answer would be no.

I get all the trade specualtion talk, at least that's still football related, but the stuff in this thread isn't. If you're going to shut down a Gruden thread in a football forum, then by the same token, keeping this thread open, at least in this section, doesn't make much sense.
Click to expand...

If it bothers you so much stop clicking on the thread.. Same thing with the Gruden thread, that shouldn't of been closed either. I'm tired of living in a society where everything is censored/cancelled. If people don't want to view a topic, just don't click on it, it's that easy.. No one is forcing anyone to read anything here.
 
Carr Bombed said:
If it bothers you so much stop clicking on the thread.. Same thing with the Gruden thread, that shouldn't of been closed either. I'm tired of living in a society where everything is censored/cancelled. If people don't want to view a topic, just don't click on it, it's that easy.. No one is forcing anyone to read anything here.
Click to expand...
This thread has everything to do with the Texans and their future.
 
OptimisticTexan said:
Can you name the folks who have defended Watson?
Click to expand...

The CBS fellow on this MB for 1.

You know the crowd of lets see what we can get for Derrick in a trade guys. Are you really down with turning loose a sexual predator on society?

BTW, I said I wasn't going to comeback into this thread until here was new news. I got lured back in by Carbomed by making a joke.

I'm out,
 
thunderkyss said:
Not at all. I could go to church meet a woman, develop a relationship & consumate that relationship. That doesn't mean I go to church so I could consummate a relationship with women.

Watson admitted to consensual sex, but provided no time line. For all we know that consensual sex was not even on the same day as the massage session.
Click to expand...
In your church do you direct women to oil your butt while you are standing up and singing?
 
thunderkyss said:
What happened happened. The court is only going to say whether the prosecution can prove it or not.

You're right, I don't know what happened. But from all the extra stories that have come out, tweets & texts that we've seen, corroborating testimonies of peoples involved.... something happened. Something that shouldn't have.
Click to expand...

Excellent post. Because he was warned by his own PR firm to not look for women (for any reason) on sites like Instagram. His firm told him it will lead to unwanted things. He ignored the warning and next thing he knows (before it was public) had a woman seeking money to settle what she was claiming he did. His PR personal said he should pay it and let it go away. That was the advice he was given. Instead, he flat refused, causing his PR people to warn him that he was going down a bad road and needed to stop. He again didn't care and a few weeks later it hit the fan. Not only the original (represented by Buzz the whole time) came forward but then more started trickling in. To the point where 20+ are now waiting for court. Along with a few criminal charges.

Would it have happened if he had listened to the PR team? Would he have stopped the Instagram hookups? I don't think he was or is capable of it. He seems to have a very addictive personality and I think he liked the chase, and anything that he was in control. After all, his girlfriend is an Instagram star (or was). .
 
thunderkyss said:
Not at all. I could go to church meet a woman, develop a relationship & consumate that relationship. That doesn't mean I go to church so I could consummate a relationship with women.

Watson admitted to consensual sex, but provided no time line. For all we know that consensual sex was not even on the same day as the massage session.
Click to expand...
Still, Rusty said consensual sex happened during some of those massage sessions. I’m not concerned about Watson not providing a timeline. The text messages will speak for themselves. He used the internet under the guise of a massage to get sex. Since Rusty already admitted consensual sex happened with some, what about the others? Why not all of them?
 
Dejaview said:
In your church do you direct women to oil your butt while you are standing up and singing?
Click to expand...
If you are referring to my post you have completely missed the point. Point was consensual sex is not the objective of church but it could be a motive during a massage. I thought it was a bad example for explaining a timeline.
 
amazing80 said:
Maybe. But I think its fair to say the only ones giving their version of what happened are the accusers. Watson's team has said very little outside of consensual sex.
Click to expand...

Because every time they have it’s backfired on them. Remember the number of women that came forward to say he didn’t do anything with them, only for it to come out that one of them warned Watson he was getting a reputation and she didn’t want to work with him anymore.

Believe me if Hardin thought that attacking would help them win he was be in full bulldog mode.
 
I honestly hate this crap but I will say if it was me on either side of this I would be pissed as hell if my lawyer was putting stuff out in public to let the other side know what I was bringing to trial. It does not matter what we think. Only what the jurors see & hear at the trial.

If either side thinks that all this has prejudiced the jury pool to the point where they feel they can't find unbiased jurors they are going to file for a change in venue & extensions. Which does nothing but extend the time until this is settled one way or another.
 
M
thunderkyss said:
There was no time-line. As I stated the consensual sex was never mentioned to be at the time of a massage session .
Click to expand...
maybe?? I misread your intent. But I thought you were using a church example for saying DW’s actions were as innocent as just happening from a desire to attend a church service Which have totally different motives than a massage. Anyway I’m sick of this ****.
 
SnakeEyes said:
Excellent post. Because he was warned by his own PR firm to not look for women (for any reason) on sites like Instagram. His firm told him it will lead to unwanted things. He ignored the warning and next thing he knows (before it was public) had a woman seeking money to settle what she was claiming he did. His PR personal said he should pay it and let it go away. That was the advice he was given. Instead, he flat refused, causing his PR people to warn him that he was going down a bad road and needed to stop. He again didn't care and a few weeks later it hit the fan. Not only the original (represented by Buzz the whole time) came forward but then more started trickling in. To the point where 20+ are now waiting for court. Along with a few criminal charges.

Would it have happened if he had listened to the PR team? Would he have stopped the Instagram hookups? I don't think he was or is capable of it. He seems to have a very addictive personality and I think he liked the chase, and anything that he was in control. After all, his girlfriend is an Instagram star (or was). .
Click to expand...
Add in the lady that told him as a friend that his name was circulated around that community in the wrong way. He ignored her advice to chill out and kept doing that as well as hitting up Instagram.
 
thunderkyss said:
Like Cosby or OJ?

My point is there is more than accusations. There’s a lot of corroborating testimony. The question isn’t if he’s guilty, it’s what is he guilty of.
Click to expand...
Alot of corroborating testimony like what...witnesses to the deeds? Cuz as of right now it's all hearsay and nothing substantial to go off of. Last time I checked the trial hasn't even started yet, so where are you getting this testimony from?
 
thunderkyss said:
My point is there is more than accusations. There’s a lot of corroborating testimony. The question isn’t if he’s guilty, it’s what is he guilty of.
Click to expand...
cbs1507 said:
Alot of corroborating testimony like what...witnesses to the deeds? Cuz as of right now it's all hearsay and nothing substantial to go off of. Last time I checked the trial hasn't even started yet, so where are you getting this testimony from?
Click to expand...
I believe you need to revisit the legal definition of "witness." A witness is a person who saw a crime or was a victim of a crime. The victims are all corroborating each other's experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top