Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

Sexual Assault Suits Against Watson

CloakNNNdagger said:
The arbitrator judge will not ultimately be able to make the final decision re. blocking/allowing the release.
Click to expand...
Correct. He's filing the motion in his civil suits. It will be that judge/judges who will authorize any subpoena or compell the NFL to release information.


CloakNNNdagger said:
Buzbee could be beginning to consider building a lawsuit against the NFL.
Click to expand...
Hence the "fishing" comment. He's looking for something he can file against the NFL.
 
JB said:
You implied that it was poignant to you. You can't determine how it made others feel. If it was big news to you then it hasn't gone away, just time keeps going on what was current may have changed. If you put the importance to it, it's up to you to determine why and what to do with it. Do your own research if it means something to you
Click to expand...
I’ve got to do some research to figure out what you just said…but I bet it was important!
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
The arbitrator judge will not ultimately be able to make the final decision re. blocking/allowing the release. Buzbee could be beginning to consider building a lawsuit against the NFL.
Click to expand...

Yep, and you better believe the other owners/God'ell and the NFL are very aware of this. It will happen if Buzbee doesn't get the documents he requsted. Buzbee isn't a guy to mess around with. He's singularly focused and doesn't give 2 craps about what happens with the NFL. He only cares about winning as much as possible for his clients. As it should be, atleast this way a Pervert will be held responsible for his actions in some ways.


What I'm finding hilarious about this thread is looking back and seeing some of the responses I got when I started this thread vs what most posters are posting now. Pure comedy gold
 
JB said:
You implied that it was poignant to you. You can't determine how it made others feel. If it was big news to you then it hasn't gone away, just time keeps going on what was current may have changed. If you put the importance to it, it's up to you to determine why and what to do with it. Do your own research if it means something to you
Click to expand...
Ok I’ve reread your post and now I believe we are not even on the same page. A post a couple of pages back stated insider NFL info told them DW was going to be suspended for two years. Yep, that’s poignant. About the only thing that matters now on this thread. I can’t research somebody else’s insider info, btw. That’s why I wanted to see a summary. Does that info still stand? Is the insider still maintaining the same stance? Any updates? This thing just went away but it’s of every importance because these cases don’t mean squat if the NFL doesn’t take them seriously. Don’t know how you came to your conclusions
 
Dejaview said:
A post a couple of pages back stated insider NFL info told them DW was going to be suspended for two years.
Click to expand...
Surely the insider said the league is seeking multiple years. No one inside the NFL knows what the judge will decide

now, just because an insider said the league is seeking two years (or whatever) & the judge decides on 4 games (or whatever) does not mean that an inside source was wrong
 
thunderkyss said:
Surely the insider said the league is seeking multiple years. No one inside the NFL knows what the judge will decide

now, just because an insider said the league is seeking two years (or whatever) & the judge decides on 4 games (or whatever) does not mean that an inside source was wrong
Click to expand...
Didn’t say the insider was wrong, I want them to be right. But why can’t an NFL insider know what suspension will be handed down now?
 
Last edited:
JB said:
I don't think you know what the word means

Decision hasn't been made yet, no one knows, perhaps not even Sue
Click to expand...
Yep meant pertinent. From what I’ve read on this board she doesn’t have the absolute final say. Will her decision necessarily be published if it’s under appeal Or is only the final decision published? That’s the only decision that matters.
 
steelbtexan said:
Yep, and you better believe the other owners/God'ell and the NFL are very aware of this. It will happen if Buzbee doesn't get the documents he requsted. Buzbee isn't a guy to mess around with. He's singularly focused and doesn't give 2 craps about what happens with the NFL. He only cares about winning as much as possible for his clients. As it should be, atleast this way a Pervert will be held responsible for his actions in some ways.


What I'm finding hilarious about this thread is looking back and seeing some of the responses I got when I started this thread vs what most posters are posting now. Pure comedy gold
Click to expand...
I’ve been trying to tell all the activists/wokes this ever since Derapist’s cover was blown wide open by them 26 masseuses. They’re an ignorant bunch that take memes and fake social media posts as actual news and run with it. The fact to the matter is, Buzbee has taken down oil giants and other corporations that are way more powerful than the NFL. But, hey, I guess any “ambulance chaser” as they like to call him can do that right? Unless all 26 masseuses were flat out lying, the NFL and Depredator will pay a pretty penny and I’m sure the commissioner wants no part of that.
 
thunderkyss said:
Surely the insider said the league is seeking multiple years. No one inside the NFL knows what the judge will decide

now, just because an insider said the league is seeking two years (or whatever) & the judge decides on 4 games (or whatever) does not mean that an inside source was wrong
Click to expand...
TK do you know if the judge’s decision would be published if it was appealed? it almost seems as if her decision is only to inform Goodell’s final determination.
 
In August 2014, Josina Anderson was heavily criticised for her on-air report on former St. Louis Rams’ defensive end Michael Sam’s showering habits. She was reporting from St. Louis where Sam had survived the first round of lay-offs and reported that she had been informed by an unnamed player that Sam, the first openly gay player in an NFL training camp, would not take a shower before all his teammates had done so.

Both she and ESPN were at the receiving end of widespread condemnation afterwards. Everyone from Sam’s teammates to LGBT activists to fellow media personalities spoke out against the segment. Rams’ coach Jeff Fisher went as far as calling it “manufactured” and accusing Anderson of being “unethical” and “unprofessional”. On their part, ESPN initially defended the segment, but later issued a public apology.
 
Dejaview said:
From what I’ve read on this board she doesn’t have the absolute final say.
Click to expand...
It's been posted here many times that if her recommendation is no punishment, it cannot be appealed. If the punishment is to light or heavy it MAY be appealed, but it may not. Why are you trying to read the tea leaves before the water has even boiled?
 
JB said:
It's been posted here many times that if her recommendation is no punishment, it cannot be appealed. If the punishment is to light or heavy it MAY be appealed, but it may not. Why are you trying to read the tea leaves before the water has even boiled?
Click to expand...
Let it rest bro. I know it can’t be appealed if her determination is for no punishment. That’s why I used words like “absolute final say” and I used the word appeal meaning the decision will be appealed meaning there was punishment involved. For some reason, lol, I automatically assumed he will be punished. If I want to read the tea leaves that is of no concern of yours. Once again for your edification, and I’ll write real slow, I was interested in the insider info claiming DW will be suspended for two years. So if she proposes punishment, but for less than a two year suspension, how firm could this two year info be? Firm I’m hoping and is her proposal already actually known? When you think about it, why would her determination be published if it is going to appeal? That only gets the lawyers making threats again which IMO which can/will defeat the process for an ultimate “uncoerced“ league decision. At that stage what the league determines should be only between the NFL and DW.
 
To give everyone something to hang your hat on timeline-wise.............barring a finding of no violation of the Personal Conduct Policy, according to the CBA, any appeal shall be in writing within three business days of the Disciplinary Officer’s decision, and any response to the appeal shall be filed in writing within two business days thereafter.

With the appeal process being only 5 days before the truly final decision is made regarding the length of suspension, it would surprise me if any public announcement by the NFL will be made before that time.
 
steelbtexan said:
What I really hope happens to him is karma and your right there's nothing we as fans can do about it except stop watching NFL football. BTW, if nobody else cares then that's a sad statement about where we are as a society and the sad thing is you're probably correct.
Click to expand...
Last year I told you I wasn't giving the Texans any monetary means from any source of my income. I watched all their games via game pass,non live,plus I like the condensed games anyway. I went to 1 game and that was because my business partner had a suite vs Rams which was a fiasco. Game was over quickly. I will probably watch a few more than last year, but I'm not giving my attention to a team that's sorry, I have other games I can watch to enjoy competition. Overall, the nfl in general are just like every other major corporation in terms of care level towards the consumer. They know their product is bulletproof because we're a event society like Hollywood. People are still watching movies by Spacy, weinstein, and all the other people who was doing ridiculous stuff in Hollywood and nothing changed. Its the world we live in.
 
leebigeztx said:
Last year I told you I wasn't giving the Texans any monetary means from any source of my income. I watched all their games via game pass,non live,plus I like the condensed games anyway. I went to 1 game and that was because my business partner had a suite vs Rams which was a fiasco. Game was over quickly. I will probably watch a few more than last year, but I'm not giving my attention to a team that's sorry, I have other games I can watch to enjoy competition. Overall, the nfl in general are just like every other major corporation in terms of care level towards the consumer. They know their product is bulletproof because we're a event society like Hollywood. People are still watching movies by Spacy, weinstein, and all the other people who was doing ridiculous stuff in Hollywood and nothing changed. Its the world we live in.
Click to expand...
They were 4-12 Watson’s last year and you probably watched every game….
 
djohn2oo8 said:
I thought it was the week of, not necessarily the 11th.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1546501567003639811
Click to expand...
And, yes, public reaction is critical. The entire Personal Conduct Policy apparatus is a P.R. tool. The vast majority of American employers do not discipline or discharge employees based on off-duty misconduct. As long as the employee is able to show up for work (and isn’t, you know, in prison), it’s not the employer’s business.
Click to expand...

What world does Florio live in? If that employee's actions outside the office grossly (especially publicly) denigrates the company's reputation, that emplyee will be looking for another job sooner than later.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
Josina Anderson is at it again. Now claiming from her “source” that the hearing focused on four women not five. I guess next week it will be down to three. It’s embarrassing how bad she is at this
Click to expand...

1657552209863.png


The argument for the "proponderence of the evidence" is applicable to a civil suit proceding. That is not what the Personal Conduct Policy procedings are based on.........the NFL has repeatedly made it clear that the NFL procedings are not meant to replace criminal or civil procedings.

It is clear that all of Anderson's information/leaks (questionable accuracy without context) is coming straight from Watson's camp, not something that will not likely make itself endearing to Robinson.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
View attachment 10373


The argument for the "proponderence of the evidence" is applicable to a civil suit proceding. That is not what the Personal Conduct Policy procedings are based on.........the NFL has repeatedly made it clear that the NFL procedings are not meant to replace criminal or civil procedings.

It is clear that all of Anderson's information/leaks (questionable accuracy without context) is coming straight from Watson's camp, not something that will not likely make itself endearing to Robinson.
Click to expand...
Certainly if it hasn’t happened already, she may lose her actual credible NFL sources for good. If I’m not mistaken, the CBA makes mention of credible evidence, not preponderance.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1238318490697768960

Well hello again Josina.
Click to expand...
For those that keep harping on wording of what the Policy considers "violation," be aware the Policy has much further reaching applications than the listed potential infractions.

From the NFL PCP:

But even if the conduct does not result in a criminal conviction, players found to have engaged in any of the following conduct will be subject to discipline. Prohibited conduct includes but is not limited to the following:

 Actual or threatened physical violence against another person, including dating violence, domestic violence, child abuse, and other forms of family violence;
Assault and/or battery, including sexual assault or other sex offenses;
 Violent or threatening behavior toward another employee or a third party in any workplace setting;
 Stalking, harassment, or similar forms of intimidation;
 Illegal possession of a gun or other weapon (such as explosives, toxic substances, and the like), or possession of a gun or other weapon in any workplace setting;
 Illegal possession, use, or distribution of alcohol or drugs;
 Possession, use, or distribution of steroids or other performance enhancing substances;
 Crimes involving cruelty to animals as defined by state or federal law;
 Crimes of dishonesty such as blackmail, extortion, fraud, money laundering, or racketeering;
 Theft-related crimes such as burglary, robbery, or larceny;
 Disorderly conduct;
 Crimes against law enforcement, such as obstruction, resisting arrest, or harming a police officer or other law enforcement officer;
 Conduct that poses a genuine danger to the safety and well-being of another person; and
 Conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL personnel.
 
This goes back to 2017:

The league’s phrase of choice for these cases is “credible evidence.” It apparently doesn’t mean that all evidence must be credible. It apparently doesn’t mean that most evidence must be credible. It apparently means only that some evidence must be credible.

How much? That’s for the Commissioner to decide. And as long as some of the evidence is credible — even if the rest of it isn’t credible — the league can discipline the player, and the player has no real options, either via internal appeal or external legal proceedings.

link
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
For those that keep harping on wording of what the Policy considers "violation," be aware the Policy has much further reaching applications than the listed potential infractions.

From the NFL PCP:

But even if the conduct does not result in a criminal conviction, players found to have engaged in any of the following conduct will be subject to discipline. Prohibited conduct includes but is not limited to the following:

 Actual or threatened physical violence against another person, including dating violence, domestic violence, child abuse, and other forms of family violence;
Assault and/or battery, including sexual assault or other sex offenses;
 Violent or threatening behavior toward another employee or a third party in any workplace setting;
 Stalking, harassment, or similar forms of intimidation;
 Illegal possession of a gun or other weapon (such as explosives, toxic substances, and the like), or possession of a gun or other weapon in any workplace setting;
 Illegal possession, use, or distribution of alcohol or drugs;
 Possession, use, or distribution of steroids or other performance enhancing substances;
 Crimes involving cruelty to animals as defined by state or federal law;
 Crimes of dishonesty such as blackmail, extortion, fraud, money laundering, or racketeering;
 Theft-related crimes such as burglary, robbery, or larceny;
 Disorderly conduct;
 Crimes against law enforcement, such as obstruction, resisting arrest, or harming a police officer or other law enforcement officer;
 Conduct that poses a genuine danger to the safety and well-being of another person; and
 Conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL personnel.
Click to expand...
And let's not forget this particular cause of action emphasized in the Personal Conduct Policy for the League's and judge's determination of both the finding of violation and of the length of subsequent suspension:

"A failure to cooperate with an investigation or to be truthful in responding to inquiries will be separate grounds for disciplinary action."
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
For those that keep harping on wording of what the Policy considers "violation," be aware the Policy has much further reaching applications than the listed potential infractions.

From the NFL PCP:

But even if the conduct does not result in a criminal conviction, players found to have engaged in any of the following conduct will be subject to discipline. Prohibited conduct includes but is not limited to the following:

 Actual or threatened physical violence against another person, including dating violence, domestic violence, child abuse, and other forms of family violence;
Assault and/or battery, including sexual assault or other sex offenses;
 Violent or threatening behavior toward another employee or a third party in any workplace setting;
 Stalking, harassment, or similar forms of intimidation;
 Illegal possession of a gun or other weapon (such as explosives, toxic substances, and the like), or possession of a gun or other weapon in any workplace setting;
 Illegal possession, use, or distribution of alcohol or drugs;
 Possession, use, or distribution of steroids or other performance enhancing substances;
 Crimes involving cruelty to animals as defined by state or federal law;
 Crimes of dishonesty such as blackmail, extortion, fraud, money laundering, or racketeering;
 Theft-related crimes such as burglary, robbery, or larceny;
 Disorderly conduct;
 Crimes against law enforcement, such as obstruction, resisting arrest, or harming a police officer or other law enforcement officer;
 Conduct that poses a genuine danger to the safety and well-being of another person; and
 Conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL personnel.
Click to expand...
The very last bolded section is where I have been since the very beginning. There is zero doubt that Watson has done exactly that. I believe Goodell and the NFL owners were concerned of backlash if they had immediately banned Watson from NFL. If I could ask Goodell one question it would be if Watson's contract is so repulsive, why did you approve?
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
This goes back to 2017:

The league’s phrase of choice for these cases is “credible evidence.” It apparently doesn’t mean that all evidence must be credible. It apparently doesn’t mean that most evidence must be credible. It apparently means only that some evidence must be credible.

How much? That’s for the Commissioner to decide. And as long as some of the evidence is credible — even if the rest of it isn’t credible — the league can discipline the player, and the player has no real options, either via internal appeal or external legal proceedings.

link
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
badboy said:
The very last bolded section is where I have been since the very beginning. There is zero doubt that Watson has done exactly that. I believe Goodell and the NFL owners were concerned of backlash if they had immediately banned Watson from NFL. If I could ask Goodell one question it would be if Watson's contract is so repulsive, why did you approve?
Click to expand...
Good point. I know Goodell works for the owners, but he has not done a good job helping the Texans and even Browns navigate this mess. I know hindsight is 20/20, but he and the league office sat around and watch the Texans pay Watson $10M to not play a down. He allowed the idiotic Browns to set the QB market that will impact the negotiations for other owners with Burrow, Hebert, Jackson and others.

I could be wrong, but it seems that by reneging on his contract, then getting paid $10M by the Texans to do nothing and this new contract with the Browns, Goodell and the league office are just like fans sitting idly by and watching this train wreck.
 
On what specific grounds could the league reject a proposed player contract?

I'm asking this fully having zero notion of what the answer could be, just genuinely curious the answer.. or if the answer is even a publicly known value.
 
badboy said:
Doesn’t happen often. This gives minimal info. All I can find quickly:

| NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) | Over The Cap

NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement | Over the Cap
overthecap.com
Click to expand...

I appreciate the effort bud, but like you said there's really not a whole lot there in the way of specifics. Points a little bit to rookie contacts/performance incentives and to the salary cap, but I'm not seeing anything relative to what we know about Watson's deal.
 
Mollywhopper said:
On what specific grounds could the league reject a proposed player contract?

I'm asking this fully having zero notion of what the answer could be, just genuinely curious the answer.. or if the answer is even a publicly known value.
Click to expand...
Theoretically the NFL anti-tampering rules would allow denial/reversal of player trades and contracts. However, with all the tampering accusations in the past, teams not players have been penalized.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Theoretically the NFL anti-tampering rules would allow denial/reversal of player trades and contracts. However, with all the tampering accusations in the past, teams not players have been penalized.
Click to expand...

What did I miss in regards to tampering regarding Cleveland and Watson/his representatives?

Most people are up in arms about the structure of his contract and how it attempts to skirt his punishment financially and to my understanding that's where the talk of rejecting the contract stems.
 
Mollywhopper said:
What did I miss in regards to tampering regarding Cleveland and Watson/his representatives?

Most people are up in arms about the structure of his contract and how it attempts to skirt his punishment financially and to my understanding that's where the talk of rejecting the contract stems.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, it appears that the Browns are standing on the reason for the contract structure was for salary cap purposes only. Have you heard of ongoing discussions re. the possibility of calling the Browns on that? Even if that were the case, I wonder if they would be able to cancel the entire contract.........or force the 2022 portion of the contract to revert to ~$46 million expected under normal circumstances.......and possible additional penalization of the Browns?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top