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

Sexual Assault Suits Against Watson

ATXtexanfan said:
What baller thought about the yahoo right up.

I love me some DW4 but he's screwed on this. Dude had a fettish. Used his power and money to act upon it. Got sloppy and crossed lines.
Click to expand...


No worries. Your mind is made. No jurry duty for the "baller."
 
ATXtexanfan said:
My mind wasn't made initially.
22 women later, things change. At one point did you realize
Cosby did it? 2 women? 5? 22?

Love the boys game. Such a shame he can't read a women like a defense
Click to expand...


No.

I realize no man is guilty without due process and trial.

You didn't even wait for a trial. Thats f'ed up.
 
If all Watson is actually found guilty of is paying for sex, we'll still get plenty of craft capitol out of him once he repents and swears allegiance to the NFL. If any of this other crap is true, back to nothingness. I don't believe for a second he's coming out of this unscaythed.
 
Thorn said:
If all Watson is actually found guilty of is paying for sex, we'll still get plenty of craft capitol out of him once he repents and swears allegiance to the NFL. If any of this other crap is true, back to nothingness. I don't believe for a second he's coming out of this unscaythed.
Click to expand...


He's scarred forever even if found innocent. @ATXtexanfan just said as much.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
Still 2 women have gone to HPD.
Click to expand...
Absolutely and that opens another interesting aspect. If at some point the DA announces charges are going forward and Watson has been indicted, the court of public opinion is going to swing wildly in favor of Buzbee's clients. On the other hand, if the DA drops the charges or a grand jury no bills Watson the same thing is going to happen in Watson's favor. A very interesting game of chicken is being played here. Hardin has really increased the stakes for his client by not settling and allowing the DA to get involved. If this results in a criminal trial and or conviction it will be a huge mistake in strategy. But, as the court of opinion has so strongly come down against Watson in the civil arena, I think Hardin believes he needs a big play to win this thing.
 
Last edited:
badboy said:
How does a trial avoid the real Court of public opinion?
Click to expand...
Because this issue is such a magnified issue in today’s world I believe if this gets settled by “ just another rich sports star” once again, I don’t see how the NFL could survive the fallout (real court of public opinion). To give recognition and awareness to the issue I believe can only be attained through an open trial where nothing would be so evidently swept under the rug by a settlement that just keeps sexual abuse under cover.
 
ColeThornton said:
Absolutely and that opens another interesting aspect. If at some point the DA announces charges are going forward and Watson has been indicted, the court of public opinion is going swing wildly in favor of Buzbee's clients. On the other hand, if the DA drops the charges or a grand jury no bills Watson the same thing is going to happen in Watson's favor. A very interesting game of chicken is being played here. Hardin has really increased the stakes for his client by not settling and allowing the DA to get involved. If this results in a criminal trial and or conviction it will be a huge mistake in strategy. But, as the court of opinion has so strongly come down against Watson in the civil arena, I think Hardin believes he needs a big play to win this thing.
Click to expand...


Keep in mind, proof in civil cases is less then necessary in criminal cases (see oj.)
 
CPTTexan said:
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.
Click to expand...
Yeah... I'm not a lawyer or a judge so I don't know exactly how that would work. But if I were King Hardin would be held in contempt & would have to prove he did not leak the name.

& if it were proven that Buzbee leaked a name the penalty would be severe for him as well.
 
Mr teX said:
That’s been going on on both sides...
Click to expand...
And another thing. LISTEN CAREFULLY "ALL" DEATH THREATS ARE A SERIOUS MATTER!!! That being said, the world we live in today is so different than years ago. For whatever reason social media brings out the absolute worse in many people. There seems to be so many lowlifes that will hide behind their keyboard and make all sorts of threats that end up meaning nothing. In my opinion, the death threat you got in an envelope left on your porch 30 years ago was more dangerous than 30 you might get now on social media.
 
Last edited:
powda said:
No.

I realize no man is guilty without due process and trial.

You didn't even wait for a trial. Thats f'ed up.
Click to expand...
No, its called opinion. Everyone has their right to one.

What is F'ed up is IF anyone takes that opinion on a jury duty and can not set aside feeling for facts.

As far as I know, none of us are in a position to make or ruin a mans life... so our opinions, in favor or against DW means less than a used kleenex.
 
KA4Texan said:
No, its called opinion. Everyone has their right to one.

What is F'ed up is IF anyone takes that opinion on a jury duty and can not set aside feeling for facts.

As far as I know, none of us are in a position to make or ruin a mans life... so our opinions, in favor or against DW means less than a used kleenex.
Click to expand...


You nailed it.
 
Man some of yall are really getting personal about this situation. 22 women came forward and spoke out. I applaud them for that. But my thing is as soon as Watson went there, they should've bounced. And Watson shouldn't have put himself out there like that or put those ladies in that type of uncomfortable situation.
 
powda said:
Keep in mind, proof in civil cases is less then necessary in criminal cases (see oj.)
Click to expand...
Absolutely, but in the OJ case there was a dead body. The only way the civil jury rules against OJ is if they believe he was the murderer. In this case even though it 22 vs 1 in the he said she said contest all the testimony they hear from each side will obviously be to defend their side... this is how it should be and the jury will understand. "However" if the Judge allows testimony in that an independent, unbiased, professional team has thorougly investigated this and decided Watson did nothing criminal... I think most jurors would find that the most compelling testimony in the trial. I know I would.
 
ColeThornton said:
Absolutely, but in the OJ case there was a dead body. The only way the civil jury rules against OJ is if they believe he was the murderer. In this case even though it 22 vs 1 in the he said she said contest all the testimony they hear from each side will obviously be to defend their side... this is how it should be and the jury will understand. "However" if the Judge allows testimony in that an independent, unbiased, professional team has thorougly investigated this and decided Watson did nothing criminal... I think most jurors would find that the most compelling testimony in the trial. I know I would.
Click to expand...


The standard by law for proof of guilt is less in civil court then it is in criminal court which is why I referenced oj.

No trial has commenced and yet some folks on both sides have decided what's what.
 
ColeThornton said:
Absolutely, but in the OJ case there was a dead body. The only way the civil jury rules against OJ is if they believe he was the murderer. In this case even though it 22 vs 1 in the he said she said contest all the testimony they hear from each side will obviously be to defend their side... this is how it should be and the jury will understand. "However" if the Judge allows testimony in that an independent, unbiased, professional team has thorougly investigated this and decided Watson did nothing criminal... I think most jurors would find that the most compelling testimony in the trial. I know I would.
Click to expand...

How would anyone know anything? If they were the only two in the room it is nothing but he said she said.

That is why my office door stays open when a female is in there. And if it needs to shut I ain’t alone.
 
TexansBull said:
How would anyone know anything? If they were the only two in the room it is nothing but he said she said.

That is why my office door stays open when a female is in there. And if it needs to shut I ain’t alone.
Click to expand...


Smart man.
 
KA4Texan said:
Well, I think the man is guilty...but Im not gonna cast stones at the man.
...... thats not gonna stop me from casting tomatoes though.

Stones are for courts... tomatoes only hurt egos.
Click to expand...


And if you were on jury would it effect your judgment without weighing all sides?
 
TexansBull said:
How would anyone know anything? If they were the only two in the room it is nothing but he said she said.

That is why my office door stays open when a female is in there. And if it needs to shut I ain’t alone.
Click to expand...
Obviously your not a sloppy man. Just curious? Were you naked with a wash cloth over your junk lol
 
powda said:
And if you were on jury would it effect your judgment without weighing all sides?
Click to expand...
Nope, as I said... I can weigh facts over feelings.

But seeing as though my stance has no bearing on a mans life, I need not take it so seriously and Im allowed to be opinionated.

Unlesss you are scheduling jury duty summonses.... in which case...

No... I can never be impartial.
 
KA4Texan said:
Nope, as I said... I can weight facts over feelings.

But seeing as though my stance has no bearing on a mans life, I need not take it so seriously and Im allowed to be opinionated.
Click to expand...


Be opiniated by all means.



Just don't convict the guy prior to trial.
 
TexansBull said:
How would anyone know anything? If they were the only two in the room it is nothing but he said she said.

That is why my office door stays open when a female is in there. And if it needs to shut I ain’t alone.
Click to expand...


Some years ago I worked with a young lady who was pretty loose. Every rig we worked on together, she was always sleeping with someone on that rig. Well the Company man caught here and like most men do, spreaded that info around the entire rig. It got back to her and she immediately reported him to that service company's HR. He was fired.


Like you I would make sure I stayed clear of that nonsense. I wouldn't stay in that trailer along with her.
 
TexansBull said:
How would anyone know anything? If they were the only two in the room it is nothing but he said she said.

That is why my office door stays open when a female is in there. And if it needs to shut I ain’t alone.
Click to expand...
They don't have to "know" in a civil case. In a criminal case it still only has to be beyond a "reasonable" doubt. The only people that ever know what happened are the ones that were there. The jury can make their decision based on whatever they want. Obviously the judge will determine what they hear in testimony but a jury doesn't have to "know" anything to reach a verdict.
 
ColeThornton said:
They don't have to "know" in a civil case. In a criminal case it still only has to be beyond a "reasonable" doubt. The only people that ever know what happened are the ones that were there. The jury can make their decision based on whatever they want. Obviously the judge will determine what they hear in testimony but a jury doesn't have to "know" anything to reach a verdict.
Click to expand...

A jury is always pushed toward tangible evidence.
 
Double Barrel said:
You tell me. I used phrases that would reveal it: "It should be..." and "It seems like..."

As far as breaking NFL pandemic protocol, Watson's actions (that he's already admitted to) reveal that.



Yep. Folks acting like the collective court of public opinion is supposed to be held to the same standards as the Supreme Court seem to be oblivious to the obvious.

The abnormal situation of 22 women making the same accusations toward one man seems simple to comprehend. . .

In a court of law, Watson is innocent until proven guilty. But, we are not a court of law, and we are free to have our opinions.
Click to expand...
The court of public opinion has spoken through Nike, Rolex, HEB, etc...
 
Folks chime in like their educated. How many of you have been on the stand as a witness in criminal or civil court a few dozen times over?
 
Mr teX said:
All the while calling DW4 every name under the sun....why? to get the public at large who are on the outside of the whole thing, riled up to turn on DW4. It’s been so obvious. b/c he knows people are gonna react to the alleged salacious details of the claims....
Click to expand...
Have you admitted you're against Buzbee in all this?

I thought he took the case public to encourage other "victims" to come out.


I've said it before, in my perfect scenario all this goes away & Watson falls in love with Houston again & leads the Texans to three Super Bowls.

But if I were going to bring a case like this against someone like Watson I know my best strategy is to get multiple accusers to come forward. That's the strength of the case.
 
Last edited:
maverick512000 said:
He did handle it legally whether you and others like it or not. The fact that you even passively blame Buzbee or Solis for her hetting death threats is beyond sickening. This is EXACTLY why Hardin wants all the names public so that they all will be attacked like this and that tactic wouldnt be needed if Hardin had any other recourse. In other words Hardin is having to get dirty because his client is dirty
Click to expand...
If Buzbee was smart he'd tell all his clients to get off public social media & stop watching the news.
 
ColeThornton said:
They don't have to "know" in a civil case. In a criminal case it still only has to be beyond a "reasonable" doubt. The only people that ever know what happened are the ones that were there. The jury can make their decision based on whatever they want. Obviously the judge will determine what they hear in testimony but a jury doesn't have to "know" anything to reach a verdict.
Click to expand...
I've been on 2 criminal juries and 1 civil jury. When the judge gave us instructions in the civil case she stressed that guilt was not based upon "beyond a shadow of a doubt" but about "the preponderance of evidence". She implied that someone that would not be convicted of a crime could lose a civil suit.
 
thunderkyss said:
Have you admitted you're against Buzbee in all this?

I thought he tool the case public to encourage other "victims" to come out.


I've said it before, in my perfect scenario all this goes away & Watson falls in love with Houston again & leads the Texans to three Super Bowls.

But if I were going to bring a case like this against someone like Watson I know my best strategy is to get multiple accusers to come forward. That's the strength of the case.
Click to expand...
Announcing he was taking the case and encouraging others to join if they have a story to tell is wildly different than the storytelling and flaunting of Jane Doe's like he has been doing. He went on a Watson smear campaign knowing Watson had zero ability to do anything since he didn't know which girls were accusing him. Now you will see Watson's team take a more aggressive stance as the names start to roll out.

And everyone keeps getting hung up on the "consensual" sex claim. I don't know why that matters. He is a grown man who hooked up with his massage therapist. It certainly isn't that abnormal for a pro athlete. That doesn't make him innocent or guilty.

And for him being naked during a massage, again that's not that abnormal. Many people remain naked. They literally tell you to undress to your comfort level. If Watson didn't have the sheet covering him, they could have covered him. Maybe they did, maybe they tried, maybe he refused. We need wayyyyy more info before conclusions can be reached on that. Hopefully we get them.
 
thunderkyss said:
Have you admitted you're against Buzbee in all this?

I thought he tool the case public to encourage other "victims" to come out.


I've said it before, in my perfect scenario all this goes away & Watson falls in love with Houston again & leads the Texans to three Super Bowls.

But if I were going to bring a case like this against someone like Watson I know my best strategy is to get multiple accusers to come forward. That's the strength of the case.
Click to expand...

no doubt in my mind that the minute he files the 1 civil suit against DW4 for his client Solis, and the media gets ahold of it, others were likely gonna come forward anyway just due to the media attention and celebrity DW4 brings himself. Maybe not 22, but certainly more than 1. IMO there was just no need to broadcast an “all comers” signal like Buzzbee did.

In my eyes he lost cred for the victims when he did that.

So yes, I’m against Buzzbee simply b/c I don’t believe this has been about getting justice for the victims like he’s trying to claim. I’m against him b/c his tactics were underhanded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top