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

Sexual Assault Suits Against Watson

TexansBull said:
Are we talking about two different things? Because I feel like we are talking about two different things.

I referring to the post that said people were fake with their outrage, basically didn’t really care about women because they didn’t volunteer, and were really only upset because they were bitter about Watson. At least that is what I got from the two posts.

I was referring at those posts as gate keeping which I believe means when a person gives you a permission to feel and act a certain way with their permission.

The gif was for humor.
Click to expand...
I love the gif and was referring to DW as possibly the horse that got out of the barn before NFL slammed it shut on sexual misbehavior. I don't see how he can get less than a year but I would never thought he would have gotten so far with his escapades before a woman stood up to him.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
This includes the Judge, league investigators, and the NFL. This was not a wise move from the Watson camp as it is grounds for a separate disciplinary action to attempt to intimidate and influence the NFL’s and Judge Robinson’s decision during an investigation.
Click to expand...
hit him with another year suspension on what Robinson suggests.
 
The guestimates are all coming from Team Watson.

************************************************************************************************************

Browns quietly brace for eight-game Deshaun Watson suspension
Posted by Mike Florio on July 19, 2022, 5:09 PM EDT


If the reasonably expected range of punishment for Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson does indeed fall in the range of two to eight games, the team that employs him currently is expecting the higher end of things.

Per a league source, the Browns privately are bracing for an eight-game suspension of Watson.


That obviously doesn’t mean anything as to the eventual outcome. It only means that the team has come to the subjective conclusion, one it would never admit publicly, that it expects to not have Watson for eight of 17 games in 2022.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
The guestimates are all coming from Team Watson.

************************************************************************************************************

Browns quietly brace for eight-game Deshaun Watson suspension
Posted by Mike Florio on July 19, 2022, 5:09 PM EDT


If the reasonably expected range of punishment for Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson does indeed fall in the range of two to eight games, the team that employs him currently is expecting the higher end of things.

Per a league source, the Browns privately are bracing for an eight-game suspension of Watson.


That obviously doesn’t mean anything as to the eventual outcome. It only means that the team has come to the subjective conclusion, one it would never admit publicly, that it expects to not have Watson for eight of 17 games in 2022.
Click to expand...
I bolded the most hilarious part (to me). By the end of this, Florio's reputation is going to be damaged more than it already is. Especially if the punishment is at least a year suspension.
 
Possibility of appeal to Roger Goodell hovers over looming ruling in Deshaun Watson case
Posted by Mike Florio on July 20, 2022, 10:27 AM EDT


Sooner or later, and probably sooner, Judge Sue L. Robinson will issue a decision regarding the discipline, if any, to be imposed on Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson. And if/when any discipline is imposed, either Watson or the league can file an appeal.

So let’s take a look at what would happen if there’s an appeal.

Here’s the relevant language from the Personal Conduct Policy as to the appeal process: “Following communication of the disciplinary decision, either the league (through the Management Council) or player (through the NFL Players Association) may appeal the decision to the Commissioner or his designee. Such appeals will be: (i) processed on an expedited basis; (ii) limited to consideration of the terms of discipline imposed; and (iii) based upon a review of the existing record without reference to evidence or testimony not previously considered. No additional evidence or testimony shall be presented to or accepted by the Commissioner or his designee. Any factual findings and evidentiary determinations of the Disciplinary Officer will be binding to the parties on appeal, and the decision of the Commissioner or his designee, which may overturn, reduce, modify or increase the discipline previously issued, will be final and binding on all parties.”

Here’s what it means. The NFL, despite the changes to the process made in 2020, still has final say over the discipline. The Commissioner or his designee (who wouldn’t be his designee if he wasn’t prepared to do what the Commissioner wants) will make a “final and binding” decision.

It must happen quickly, by rule. It cannot entail any new evidence, by rule. It must be based on the facts as Judge Robinson determines them to be, which makes her findings of fact a critical aspect of her decision. But the Commissioner can do whatever he wants, especially since the policy contains no standard of review or other restrictions on his ability to throw out Judge Robinson’s conclusion and replace it with something else. Would it be awkward to say to Judge Robinson, “Sorry, we think it should be 17 games, not four”? Yes. But not nearly as awkward as the public reaction to the perception that the league was too lenient with Watson. That’s the overriding problem for the league. Eight years ago, the mishandling of Ray Rice nearly brought the whole house down. The league can’t afford to have the same thing happen here.

That’s why it will be critical for the league to properly gauge public reaction to Judge Robinson’s ruling, and then to decide first whether to appeal it at all (there was a report several weeks back that, if Judge Robinson issues a 6-8 game suspension, maybe there won’t be) and second what to do with the appeal. Yes, public reaction matters. The entire process is a P.R. tool, aimed at giving the league a way to investigate and punish players who get in trouble when not at work. The union has agreed to it. Players are never fully off duty; the Shield never sleeps.

And so, since the league has created the Personal Conduct Policy as a vehicle for meeting public expectations, the league needs to consider those expectations when reaching a decision on Watson.
Unless Judge Robinson issues no discipline at all. That’s the only way to keep Goodell or his designee from designating her decision as insufficient, and to replace it with something that the league believes will better mesh with what the fans and media expect the final decision to be.

************************************************************************************************

The inability to introduce new evidence on appeal will only directly affect (negatively) Watson. Since Goodell will consider what he chooses to consider if the NFL appeals, the former can avoided entirely when making the final suspension determination.
 
Boris said:
not gonna lie...
i thought 66 games was a possibility
one for every violation
Click to expand...

Well, that's the question. What does Judge Robinson think the violation is. TWO grand juries have ruled there wasn't enough credible evidence to pursue criminal charges. 20 of 24 women have settled, far as I know without an admission of guilt. What did this grown man do (definitively) to these grown women?

Of course, she's got access to evidence we don't.
 
thunderkyss said:
Well, that's the question. What does Judge Robinson think the violation is. TWO grand juries have ruled there wasn't enough credible evidence to pursue criminal charges. 20 of 24 women have settled, far as I know without an admission of guilt. What did this grown man do (definitively) to these grown women?

Of course, she's got access to evidence we don't.
Click to expand...
It’s not her job to determine what he did to them. It’s her job to determine if he violated the personal conduct policy (ex: compromised the integrity of the league) Not his guilt or innocence.

The grand jury decisions have or should have no sway here.
 
thunderkyss said:
Of course, she's got access to evidence we don't.
Click to expand...
Are we sure about that? Aren't the depositions from the plaintiffs and Watson already public record? Not the settlements, but she's an arbiter. Not an actual judge that can look at NDA's from the suits. The league presented 5 cases. Judge Robinson doesn't have the info from the other 19 cases. And I doubt Team Watson is presenting that. I don't think she has much to go on, and this is going to be a sham hearing with Goodell doing whatever he wanted to do in the first place.
 
Last edited:
thunderkyss said:
Well, that's the question. What does Judge Robinson think the violation is. TWO grand juries have ruled there wasn't enough credible evidence to pursue criminal charges. 20 of 24 women have settled, far as I know without an admission of guilt. What did this grown man do (definitively) to these grown women?

Of course, she's got access to evidence we don't.
Click to expand...
How does the two grand jury no bills have anything to do with the Violation(s) of specifically the Personal Conduct Policy.
 
Lucky said:
I we sure about that? Aren't the depositions from the plaintiffs and Watson already public record? Not the settlements, but she's an arbiter. Not an actual judge that can look at NDA's from the suits. The league presented 5 cases. Judge Robinson doesn't have the info from the other 19 cases. And I doubt Team Watson is presenting that. I don't think she has much to go on, and this is going to be a sham hearing with Goodell doing whatever he wanted to do in the first place.
Click to expand...
First, no one has confirmed the league has presented 5 cases.

Secondly, depositions, text messages, and cashapp payments would be sufficient.

Thirdly, sham because of what?
 
djohn2oo8 said:
Also, didn’t the NFLPA agree to this format?
Click to expand...
The players were tired of Goodell being judge, jury, and executioner. If this process ends with Judge Robinson being the final decision maker, I think they will accept that. If Goodell puts it back in his hands, everyone is going to court.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
First, no one has confirmed the league has presented 5 cases.

Secondly, depositions, text messages, and cashapp payments would be sufficient.

Third, sham because of what?
Click to expand...
The source for that information was soley Florio, which was then picked up and run with by Josina Anderson...........not Shefter or Rapopport or any big time sports reporter. And Anderson didn't even bother finding out that one of those were not even Buzbee's clients.

It's not a sham for Goodell to make a final decision...........the League and Goodell gave up a great deal to the NFLPA and players by giving up the power and having nothing to say about the determination of a violation or not.............It seems quite fair that Goodell could delve out punishment upon appeal based on what he feels is appropriate to protect the integrity of the Shield.
 
Lucky said:
The players were tired of Goodell being judge, jury, and executioner. If this process ends with Judge Robinson being the final decision maker, I think they will accept that. If Goodell puts it back in his hands, everyone is going to court.
Click to expand...
Haha. So he’s not the judge, jury, and executioner if someone else has to find that a violation occurred. Oh and if Goodell hands out the final suspension NO COURT will overturn that.
 
Lucky said:
You should always end statements like that with "IMO".
Click to expand...
Do you put IMO in your statements? Because no court will overturn THIS decision. A collectively bargained agreement that was recently agreed to. Yeah, not happening. Courts don’t like to interfere with those kind of issues.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
It seems quite fair that Goodell could delve out punishment upon appeal based on what he feels is appropriate to protect the integrity of the Shield.
Click to expand...
That's certainly how the league will see it. The NFLPA will see it as breaking the spirit of the agreement. There's no NFL owners personal conduct policy. There is a NFL players conduct policy. And in the very first paragraph, that document states:

"It is a privilege to be part of the National Football League. Everyone who is part of the league must refrain from “conduct detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in” the NFL. This includes owners, coaches, players, other team employees, game officials, and employees of the league office, NFL Films, NFL Network, or any other NFL business."

I didn't bold "Everyone". The emphasis is in the document. So the NFLPA's possible argument to the court will be that the league is not adhering to their agreement in an even handed manner. That the man doling out punishment is free to judge players, but unable to do so with his bosses. It's likely a case that will be heard. The outcome, I don't know. But the players will have a solid case.
 
Lucky said:
That's certainly how the league will see it. The NFLPA will see it as breaking the spirit of the agreement. There's no NFL owners personal conduct policy. There is a NFL players conduct policy. And in the very first paragraph, that document states:

"It is a privilege to be part of the National Football League. Everyone who is part of the league must refrain from “conduct detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in” the NFL. This includes owners, coaches, players, other team employees, game officials, and employees of the league office, NFL Films, NFL Network, or any other NFL business."

I didn't bold "Everyone". The emphasis is in the document. So the NFLPA's possible argument to the court will be that the league is not adhering to their agreement in an even handed manner. That the man doling out punishment is free to judge players, but unable to do so with his bosses. It's likely a case that will be heard. The outcome, I don't know. But the players will have a solid case.
Click to expand...
The NFLPA agreed to the current CBA where Goodell has the power to delve out punishment if a violation is to have been found.
 
Lucky said:
That's certainly how the league will see it. The NFLPA will see it as breaking the spirit of the agreement. There's no NFL owners personal conduct policy. There is a NFL players conduct policy. And in the very first paragraph, that document states:

"It is a privilege to be part of the National Football League. Everyone who is part of the league must refrain from “conduct detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in” the NFL. This includes owners, coaches, players, other team employees, game officials, and employees of the league office, NFL Films, NFL Network, or any other NFL business."

I didn't bold "Everyone". The emphasis is in the document. So the NFLPA's possible argument to the court will be that the league is not adhering to their agreement in an even handed manner. That the man doling out punishment is free to judge players, but unable to do so with his bosses. It's likely a case that will be heard. The outcome, I don't know. But the players will have a solid case.
Click to expand...
CloakNNNdagger said:
Seems like everyone wants to talk about comparing past circumstances that have gone without punishment, or little punishment.........and try to compare it to or make it precedence for Watson's situation. That just does not work. Since this is the first case that has gone through the new Personal Conduct Policy procedings including the joint Disciplinary Officer, there is NO Precedence! The precedence will be set by the Watson case. If the judge makes her decision, it will be solely based on Watson's case..............not on previous cases not judged on the same level with the same tools. She will not factor in "past performance" which may have been flawed..............to make a further flawed decision.
Click to expand...
 
Lucky said:
It's not the agreement that will be in question. It's the interpretation of the agreement and the possible violation of the agreement by the league. IMO.
Click to expand...
Since the agreement isn’t in question a court won’t touch it. If they do, it will be politely sent back to the league to handle.
 
Lucky said:
You're correct. Let's make suppositions rather that statements of facts when there are none.
Click to expand...
There’s nothing here for a court to handle. An agreement was put into place and agreed to by two parties, and this process is going through the selected procedures. There is no violation of the agreement by the league should they appeal and set the suspension. But let me ask you this. If Judge Robinson decides there was a violation, sets a number for a suspension, with the league appealing for a lower suspension, would that be a violation still in your opinion? Or only if they decided to set a higher number?
 
Lucky said:
It's not the agreement that will be in question. It's the interpretation of the agreement and the possible violation of the agreement by the league. IMO.
Click to expand...
Have any of the owners been found to have violated the PCP?
 
JB said:
Have any of the owners been found to have violated the PCP?
Click to expand...
There have to be 5 or more owners under investigation for one thing or another. But it's not like Goodell is is giving a lot of updates (or any).
 
I think it’s interesting now how some want Goodell to be judge jury and executioner for Kraft and Jones after complaining about that way of doing things. But anyway, the whole Kraft situation happened before this new CBA so it’s a moot point and irrelevant.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
would that be a violation still in your opinion?
Click to expand...
I haven't said a word regarding my opinion of what is or isn't a violation. I'm speculating on what the NFLPA might think as a violation. You can discern the difference, right?
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
How does the two grand jury no bills have anything to do with the Violation(s) of specifically the Personal Conduct Policy.
Click to expand...
Because two no bills mean there isn’t sufficient evidence of any wrongdoing. Add to that 20 have settled without an admission of guilt.

I’ve said time & again I think he’s done something. I don’t know what. & I don’t know if whatever that is violated the personal conduct policy.

Remember Kareem Hunt? They were in the process of sweeping it under the rug when the video came out (I think it was Kareem Hunt). Same thing with Ray Rice.

I mean maybe they can get him for violating COVID protocol but violating personal conduct rule? I’m not seeing it. Not with the “evidence” we have access to.

& not with the bland response we’re getting from women’s groups.

I understand wanting to punish him because he gets more play than we do & his “girlfriend” is fine with that. But objectively from someone who wants him suspended until the last case is settled, I can’t see a reason for the NFL to suspend him.
 
Lucky said:
The players were tired of Goodell being judge, jury, and executioner. If this process ends with Judge Robinson being the final decision maker, I think they will accept that. If Goodell puts it back in his hands, everyone is going to court.
Click to expand...
Sounds like Mulegetta & Hardin will have the last word.
 
thunderkyss said:
Because two no bills mean there isn’t sufficient evidence of any wrongdoing. Add to that 20 have settled without an admission of guilt.

I’ve said time & again I think he’s done something. I don’t know what. & I don’t know if whatever that is violated the personal conduct policy.

Remember Kareem Hunt? They were in the process of sweeping it under the rug when the video came out (I think it was Kareem Hunt). Same thing with Ray Rice.

I mean maybe they can get him for violating COVID protocol but violating personal conduct rule? I’m not seeing it. Not with the “evidence” we have access to.

& not with the bland response we’re getting from women’s groups.

I understand wanting to punish him because he gets more play than we do & his “girlfriend” is fine with that. But objectively from someone who wants him suspended until the last case is settled, I can’t see a reason for the NFL to suspend him.
Click to expand...
And the Personal conduct policy mentions it is not enough to avoid criminal charges so I don’t know why people keep bringing up the grand jury.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
And the Personal conduct policy mentions it is not enough to avoid criminal charges so I don’t know why people keep bringing up the grand jury.
Click to expand...
Because we’re looking at the whole thing wrong. We as in all of us.

Nothing has gone the way “we” thought it would. I don’t see why it would start now.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
And the Personal conduct policy mentions it is not enough to avoid criminal charges so I don’t know why people keep bringing up the grand jury.
Click to expand...
And both times I mentioned the No bill I added 20 settlements with no admission of guilt. I’m not stuck on the no bills.

No bills plus 20 settlements & all 20 announced on the same day, that’s just as weird as having 20+ accusations in the first place.

& if it was obvious there was a violation it doesn’t appear to be so obvious to Judge Robinson.
 
djohn2oo8 said:
So because she hasn’t made a fast decision for either party. Jeez. She never set a timeline.
Click to expand...
Fast?

I’m just saying it’s not as obvious as you’d think. She’s deliberating. That’s what people do when it’s not obvious
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top