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

Sexual Assault Suits Against Watson

CloakNNNdagger said:
Ashley Solis has received over 10 death threats since her "coming out." The crazies have been released. Hardin knows exactly what will happen when he unleashes more crazies on the complainants.
Click to expand...

Then maybe Buzzbee shouldn't have made a spectacle out of this very serious situation, very serious accusations by trying all this in the court of public opinion. If he really cared about the safety of the accusers, he would have handled it legally, not publicly.
 
paycheck71 said:
Then maybe Buzzbee shouldn't have made a spectacle out of this very serious situation, very serious accusations by trying all this in the court of public opinion. If he really cared about the safety of the accusers, he would have handled it legally, not publicly.
Click to expand...
Again. 2 have filed criminal complaints.
 
paycheck71 said:
Then maybe Buzzbee shouldn't have made a spectacle out of this very serious situation, very serious accusations by trying all this in the court of public opinion. If he really cared about the safety of the accusers, he would have handled it legally, not publicly.
Click to expand...

you mean like the Simpson trial?
 
ColeThornton said:
I'm not trying to beat a dead horse, really just trying to understand how this works.
"Both individuals could be called to testify in either a criminal or civil claim."
This statement is from the expert attorney. So when they are called to testify at the civil trial, are they referred to as Jane Doe's mom and Jane Doe's friend? When they are sworn in, does it go, "Do you Jane Doe's mom solemly swear..."?
Click to expand...
I'm glad to see my initial thoughts were correct. According to Texas law and the Judge, in the state of Texas a plaintiff does not have the right to remain hidden while accusing, attacking, destroying someone in civil court.
 
So.. Judge orders names to be given...so she didn't say "Rusty you know you could have gotten or have them already.."
Or "those legal eagles on Texans Talk said you don't get names in civil actions."

The judge said "Texas law says defense has right to know his accusers.."

Think I am going to let this play out...
 
badboy said:
So.. Judge orders names to be given...so she didn't say "Rusty you know you could have gotten or have them already.."
Or "those legal eagles on Texans Talk said you don't get names in civil actions."

The judge said "Texas law says defense has right to know his accusers.."

Think I am going to let this play out...
Click to expand...
I wonder why so many were so sure they would be able to remain hidden. May be the case in other states.
 
ColeThornton said:
I wonder why so many were so sure they would be able to remain hidden. May be the case in other states.
Click to expand...
Nah, I think with this issue, Sports and everything else most of us believe the way we think has to be the correct way of things to actually be.
 
Jack Burton said:
Well, Florio doesn’t think the sexual predator tag matters.....

profootballtalk.nbcsports.com

Could the Eagles be lurking for Deshaun Watson?

Much has to happen before Deshaun Watson could be traded, especially if he's going to be traded at or around the 2021 draft.
profootballtalk.nbcsports.com profootballtalk.nbcsports.com
Click to expand...

Yep, I'm not surprised. I don't think there is any 'unforgivable sin' in pro sports if a guy still has great talents to win games. So that'll help his image in one city.
 
badboy said:
So.. Judge orders names to be given...so she didn't say "Rusty you know you could have gotten or have them already.."
Or "those legal eagles on Texans Talk said you don't get names in civil actions."

The judge said "Texas law says defense has right to know his accusers.."

Think I am going to let this play out...
Click to expand...

Looks like judges in both cases today ruled for Hardin. Buzbee said 9 of the 12 accusers that were the subject of the 2nd hearing had already agreed to refile with their names on the complaints anyway.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
Some here are trying to make a big deal and something unusual regarding Buzbee initially "demanding" from Watson $100,000 for his client............when, in fact, it is the norm in matters of civil suit. A demand letter, or letter of demand (of payment), is a letter stating a legal claim (usually drafted by a lawyer) which makes a demand for restitution or performance of some obligation. And as far as anyone claiming that there was no attempt at "negotiating," there were multiple interchanges between Buzbee and Watson's team before communications were broken off by Buzbee. Buzbee proposed a dollar amount.......and Watson's team rejected it..........that, in itself is negotiation. Buzbee or any claimant is not obligated to negotiate down their demands. Demand letters simply act to alert a potential defendant to potential future formal litigation if the demand is not met.
Click to expand...

something as serious as sexual assault? it looks bad no matter how pro forma it is b/c to me if the encounter is/was as bad as they say it was, no amount of money is going to suffice...& if this does go to a jury of your peers I’m sure more than a few folks will look at it the same way.

If I’m on that jury, to me it gives me the impression that you’re not so emotionally distraught and damaged that you feel like you can’t be compensated......makes me question the motives. We know of 1 alleged extortion attempt told by DW4’s business manager, it’s not out of the question that there are others wrapped up in these lawsuits.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
Civil lawsuits are different in that the accused doesn’t have the right to face an accuser. Also, funny how Watson could find 18 other masseuses
Click to expand...

Facing your accuser (in court) versus knowing who the accuser is are 2 completely separate things. So what you are implying is that any person can file a civil lawsuit without the person accused having any clue who the person is? If that's the case, then the legal system is even more screwed up than the cluster I already believe it is.

Whether Watson is innocent/guilty is not my concern with this post.

I want to know how, in your mind, you equate facing your accuser in court, and knowing who the accuser is are somehow the same thing.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
Btw in high profile civil suits they are almost always handled in the media as well because of public perception. Ignorance is abound in here
Click to expand...

not in the fashion Buzzbee has taken it to. ignorance abound indeed. The judge who ruled on the case earlier today made a brief mention of this. It just simply didn’t have to go the route Buzzbee took it. He is chiefly responsible for a lot of this.

Today when put under pressure to reveal the names to Hardin, he conveniently admits “we were gonna do that anyway”....and alleges he tried to give the names to Hardin confidentially. I doubt Hardin goes out in the public and says what he says if Buzzbee had offered to do that in the 1st place...make no mistake he wants this out in the public space.
 
Mr teX said:
not in the fashion Buzzbee has taken it to. ignorance abound indeed. The judge who ruled on the case earlier today made a brief mention of this. It just simply didn’t have to go the route Buzzbee took it. He is chiefly responsible for a lot of this.

Today when put under pressure to reveal the names to Hardin, he conveniently admits “we were gonna do that anyway”....and alleges he tried to give the names to Hardin confidentially. I doubt Hardin goes out in the public and says what he says if Buzzbee had offered to do that in the 1st place...make no mistake he wants this out in the public space.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure Hardin mentioned earlier in the process (when Buzzbee was holding Instagram press conferences) that they asked Buzzbee to release the names privately, and Buzzbee refused. Again, not sure how much I can trust the public words of either lawyer here.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
Civil lawsuits are different in that the accused doesn’t have the right to face an accuser. Also, funny how Watson could find 18 other masseuses
Click to expand...
Which kind of proves Hardin and him had a list at least and could tell the 18 versus the 22. By now, Hardin knows all the days, times, and people DW4 interacted with on a table. So pressing for these ladies names to go public is not for his defense, but further power abuse against women so noone on team DW4 seems to have learned this is about abuse of power
 
Rich Schmidt said:
Which kind of proves Hardin and him had a list at least and could tell the 18 versus the 22. By now, Hardin knows all the days, times, and people DW4 interacted with on a table. So pressing for these ladies names to go public is not for his defense, but further power abuse against women so noone on team DW4 seems to have learned this is about abuse of power
Click to expand...

LOL. Team DW4 were hired to defend DW4, not to "learn" anything. Not sure why anyone would expect anything else from a team of lawyers.
 
badboy said:
So.. Judge orders names to be given...so she didn't say "Rusty you know you could have gotten or have them already.."
Or "those legal eagles on Texans Talk said you don't get names in civil actions."

The judge said "Texas law says defense has right to know his accusers.."

Think I am going to let this play out...
Click to expand...

I would have liked to have heard the judge order the name be kept secret. With the understanding if the name gets out, Hardin would have severe penalties to pay.
 
Rich Schmidt said:
Which kind of proves Hardin and him had a list at least and could tell the 18 versus the 22. By now, Hardin knows all the days, times, and people DW4 interacted with on a table. So pressing for these ladies names to go public is not for his defense, but further power abuse against women so noone on team DW4 seems to have learned this is about abuse of power
Click to expand...

they weren’t asking for them to be revealed publicly...they just wanted the names ...... period.
 
It seems pretty clear (to me) that all of this is headed for a settlement. The actions of both lawyers indicates a strategy to utilize public perception and pressure to force both sides to the negotiating table.

I'm hoping that it's headed that way soon so this can get resolved and the Texans can rid themselves of this toxic situation in order to focus on rebuilding this team. And then this thread and everything Watson-related can be relegated to the general NFL forum.
 
thunderkyss said:
I would have liked to have heard the judge order the name be kept secret. With the understanding if the name gets out, Hardin would have severe penalties to pay.
Click to expand...

In your scenario of Hardin being punished for the names being released: Would Hardin be punished if he had nothing to do with the names getting released? You make it sound like Hardin should be punished regardless, even if Buzbee released the names knowing Hardin would be punished. I'm sure that's not what you meant.....but since you didn't clarify under what scenario Hardin would be punished......then we can all go into "hypothetical" scenarios.
 
Last edited:
thunderkyss said:
I would have liked to have heard the judge order the name be kept secret. With the understanding if the name gets out, Hardin would have severe penalties to pay.
Click to expand...
I prefer the law applying the same way to everyone, besides under your scenario there would be nothing to stop someone not related to Hardin from leaking a name to harm Hardin.
 
Mr teX said:
they weren’t asking for them to be revealed publicly...they just wanted the names ...... period.
Click to expand...

This would be the smart play from Hardin. Know the accusers, collect whatever "evidence" against you can....as lawyers do....and let it play out in court, if it gets there.

Not saying the smart play will be utilized considering everything against Watson has been launched through Twitter, social media, and press conferences.
 
paycheck71 said:
Then maybe Buzzbee shouldn't have made a spectacle out of this very serious situation, very serious accusations by trying all this in the court of public opinion. If he really cared about the safety of the accusers, he would have handled it legally, not publicly.
Click to expand...

if he really cared about the safety of the accusers he wouldn’t reveal their names in a situation that, like it or not, involves a high profile sports figure that IS in the court of public opinion. At least three weeks ago he publicly appealed to women that may have been abused to come forward because they CAN remain anonymous. how do you contact these women when you have no idea who they are or how many there may be. Also at that time he asked for HPD investigation and for a grand jury to look at the cases So a legal path was considered.
 
paycheck71 said:
Pretty sure Hardin mentioned earlier in the process (when Buzzbee was holding Instagram press conferences) that they asked Buzzbee to release the names privately, and Buzzbee refused. Again, not sure how much I can trust the public words of either lawyer here.
Click to expand...
That's only part of the story. Buzbee, as is the case in many sexual abuse situations, requested a confidentiality agreement in return which Hardin refused. It should be obvious why.........his main goal was to create an intimidating en masse attack toward the victims.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
That's only part of the story. Buzbee, as is the case in many sexual abuse situations, requested a confidentiality agreement in return which Hardin refused. It should be obvious why.........his main goal was to create an intimidating en masse attack toward the victims.
Click to expand...

So fighting fire with fire? Seeing as Buzbee has made a public intimidating en masse attack against Watson. Buzbee could himself have kept this out of a public domain fight. He chose not to....given the literal hundreds of twitter links in this very thread.

Just so no one is confused: If Watson is indeed guilty of even 1 of the accusations against him and he's found guilty in court, then he gets what he deserves.
 
Dejaview said:
if he really cared about the safety of the accusers he wouldn’t reveal their names in a situation that, like it or not, involves a high profile sports figure that IS in the court of public opinion. At least three weeks ago he publicly appealed to women that may have been abused to come forward because they CAN remain anonymous. how do you contact these women when you have no idea who they are or how many there may be. Also at that time he asked for HPD investigation and for a grand jury to look at the cases So a legal path was considered.
Click to expand...

Buzzbee is playing games...he wants to play out in the court of public opinion but only if he can hide his clients. It the equivalent of throwing rocks and hiding your hand.
Hardin I believe is just trying to get a handle on the direction from which the rocks are coming from.
 
TexansBull said:
How many women will drop their lawsuits to avoid having their names in public?
20%
50%
80%
Click to expand...

My hope is that if he is guilty of what he's being accused of, then none of them will drop.

In reality: half would be my guess due to the scrutiny they may/will receive....which is unfortunate
 
Dejaview said:
if he really cared about the safety of the accusers he wouldn’t reveal their names in a situation that, like it or not, involves a high profile sports figure that IS in the court of public opinion. At least three weeks ago he publicly appealed to women that may have been abused to come forward because they CAN remain anonymous. how do you contact these women when you have no idea who they are or how many there may be. Also at that time he asked for HPD investigation and for a grand jury to look at the cases So a legal path was considered.
Click to expand...
That is a great point!!! I also recall Buzbee specifically saying these women could remain anonymous. He didn't specify that some could, some couldn't etc... he announced to anyone listening they could come forward and remain anonymous. I wonder how many, if any, of the ones the Judge ruled on today to be made public were under this impression created by Buzbee?
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
It's obvious that you have little understanding of what goes on in sexual assault cases. As a reconstructive surgeon, I have repeatedly seen first hand what goes through the minds of my sexually victimized patients. Even when the evidence is clear, their mental trauma in even thinking about forcing the issue to civil or criminal court is overwhelming. That's why most do not see it through to the end. It's persons like you that would only choose to believe a victim if she were video taping the encounters with full audio (if even then)..............and that would expose her to innumerable charges besides having her claims legally ignored.
Click to expand...
That's assuming that the women are actually sexual assault victims and NOT lying. That's the problem in situations like these. You can't question the women's allegations/motives or else "you're attacking victims". Well who is the victim IF the women are lying?
 
Last edited:
ColeThornton said:
That is a great point!!! I also recall Buzbee specifically saying these women could remain anonymous. He didn't specify that some could, some couldn't etc... he announced to anyone listening they could come forward and remain anonymous. I wonder how many, if any, of the ones the Judge ruled on today to be made public were under this impression created by Buzbee?
Click to expand...

then he told them wrong as it pertains to Texas law.
 
Double Barrel said:
Yep. Watson's arrogance is going to be his downfall.

Let him take it to court and have 22 women testify against him. He can either testify, where his statements can be used against him in a criminal trial (and no doubt that Buzzbee would have a field day here), or, he can plead the 5th and lose all of the cases.

Legal experts are advising that Hardin's latest maneuver with the demand for names is most likely a pressure tactic to get these women to settle. Buzzbee already offered Hardin their names in private, but Watson's side wants that fear of public victim shaming to help bring this matter to the negotiating table for settlements.

The longer this drags on - win or lose - the worse it looks for Watson. His reputation will always be connected to sexual predator now.
Click to expand...
I have two points of contention I would like to focus on in your comment.

First, there no guarantee that there will be 22 women in trial. As the vetting process may take care of any frivolous or fraudulent claims from that figure. Come trial time that number may be much lower, especially considering there was only 1 police report.

Second, where is your evidence to claim Buzbee offered Hardin these names privately? I think you're making that up. Cuz if that were true, the judge wouldn't be siding in Watson's/Hardin's favor with having their names released.
 
Last edited:
CloakNNNdagger said:
That's only part of the story. Buzbee, as is the case in many sexual abuse situations, requested a confidentiality agreement in return which Hardin refused. It should be obvious why.........his main goal was to create an intimidating en masse attack toward the victims.
Click to expand...
You are throwing out some wild theories. They asked for the names so they would be informed of the people making these accusations. Now they can spend time going through messages between them and Watson. So many on this board have already found Watson guilty....people need to chill and let this play out.

Getting rid of him from the team and finding him guilty of this are separate issues. Seems to me that people are comingling the two which is a shame.
 
cbs1507 said:
Second, where is your evidence to claim Buzbee offered Hardin these names privately? I think you're making that up. Cuz if that were true, the judge wouldn't be siding in Watson's/Hardin's favor with having their names released.
Click to expand...

I believe that came out in the court proceedings this morning. As I recall, Hardin didn't challenge the claim, probably because there is a record of it.
 
ColeThornton said:
I believe that came out in the court proceedings this morning. As I recall, Hardin didn't challenge the claim, probably because there is a record of it.
Click to expand...

Yep. Folks need to pay attention instead of jumping to assumptions.

cbs1507 said:
First, there no guarantee that there will be 22 women in trial. As the vetting process may take care of any frivolous or fraudulent claims from that figure. Come trial time that number may be much lower, especially considering there was only 1 police report.
Click to expand...

Police reports are not required in a civil case, so that part is irrelevant.

My point, as discussed by many legal experts, is that Watson will have two choices if these cases make it to trial. He can plead the 5th and look terrible against the testimony of 1-22 women, or, he can be cross-examined and everything he says will be under oath and can be used against him in a criminal trial.

And with the haphazard way that Watson appears to be operating for the past couple of years, I'd bet that the last thing his lawyer is advising is to testify in a court of law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top