Deshaun Watson accused of sexual assault in lawsuit

[Simpelton]

Took him long enough.

 

[Ring 6]

Civil with no facts.

Time is running out for Buzz.

The facts will come out when the cases are heard. Why would you expect something different?

 

[Simpelton]

You insist on posting things that are not true.

• Buzbee is an attorney, but not a DA. Therefore, he's not filing charges, which would be part of a criminal proceeding.

Which is why I didn't say "file charges," I said "submit a police report," which Buzbee CAN do on behalf of his client/s, and OH LOOK, he just did.

In fact the post you're quoting doesn't say "filing charges" anywhere but does say "submit a police report" at least twice, which demonstrates your reading comprehension level rather ably.

• In terms of civil cases, Buzbee doesn't need to provide any evidence outside of the framework of court proceedings.

But it helps. An affidavit to the police becomes facts in evidence for both the civil and the criminal component, and any facts and evidence the police find becomes admissible in the civil side of things. Again, the question I was asking was why was he dragging his feet on this. He knows, probably better than either you or I, how pivotal police investigations can be to a civil case. Even though you can win without this evidence, the fact that it's easier with it still makes the question more relevant than you'd like it to be.

Moreover he should know, that the longer from the incident the affidavit is taken the less credible it is. A statement taken the day of, or the week of, is taken far more seriously than a statement made significantly later, simply as a matter of how human memory works. This delay has given the defense ammunition that was not needed.

 

[Ring 6]

Show me where I've done that. You're rejecting my position not becuse of its merit but because it's a position you don't like, and you're showering me with all the epithets you can think of because clearly anything that you do not agree with must be morally abhorrent.

In other words you're everything wrong with debates of this nature. Sensationalist, emotional, and above all, severely egotistical.

Now we could continue on this vein and get the thread locked, because I'm pretty sure that what you just said to me is a GROSS violation of forum guidelines, or you could cool off, grow a sense of perspective, and stick to the facts of the case. I'm not going to try to make that choice for you, but those are your options, and I know which one would probably be better for your personal sanity.

What I said to you is an accurate depiction of your attitude. You have from the start blamed the victim, argued that they are lying gold diggers and are now saying a masseuse has consented to race unless they refund their massage fee.
Your comments are insulting. No one with respect for women would make comments like that.

 

[Ring 6]

My crime is not instantly rushing to the side of any girl, any girl at all, who merely makes claims of sexual assault and offers no proof or evidence whatsoever and moreover, makes absolutely no attempt whatsoever to secure a chain of evidence. In other words, of waiting for facts and evidence -- something, ANYTHING -- to be in place before falling over myself to crush the civil rights of the accusee in the name of feel-good sensationalism.

If that's the crime of which you accuse me @Ring 6, I proudly plead guilty of all charges

No. Unless you just are not very smart, no victim is required to make their identity or the details of their complaint public not abide by a timeframe that you wish for.
They have done absolutely nothing wrong by filing anonymously to protect their identity and choosing to not make public details of the accusations. The fact that you feel a right to know their personal business is really part of what sucks about your attitude.
And don’t hide behind “waiting for facts” you are actively accusing them of lying, insulting them and making claims such as agreeing to do a massage is consenting to sex.
Attitudes like your are the reason rapists got away with rape for years by shaming the victims, putting the way the dress, their sex life on trial and accused them of asking for it. It’s just shocking that you can spend your time trying to attach cute names to Watsons genitalia and sexual function, imply these women should just happily accept it, and have yet to utter a work of empathy toward the victim. I mean it’s your business if you hate women but it’s annoying to see.

 

[JetFan79]

The facts will come out when the cases are heard. Why would you expect something different?

1. Because they usually come out ahead of time in cases like these.

2. Because Buzz himself actually did release some "facts". Those text messages that I suppose Buzz thought were his best ammo. Yet actually worked in DW's favor.

Can't release some "facts", then claim you're not releasing info because you don't have to. I mean, ya can, but folks will know you're a BS artist.

 

[Deus Irae]

I'm just saying how public opinion will work. Which is all that matters here.

*edit: all that mattered prior to the police report.

I'm not sure where you came up with that theory

 

[Deus Irae]

Which is why I didn't say "file charges," I said "submit a police report," which Buzbee CAN do on behalf of his client/s, and OH LOOK, he just did.

The person I responded to DID say file charges.

NYCPATS4LIFE said:

Hey buzzbee let’s see some evidence or file criminal charges.

Your response to me saying that's not how it works was to post

Simpelton said:

Eventually, he has to do it.

 

[Ring 6]

1. Because they usually come out ahead of time in cases like these.

[/QUOTE]
That’s just not true. Sexual assault victims are the least likely victims to publicize their details outside of the court room

2. Because Buzz himself actually did release some "facts". Those text messages that I suppose Buzz thought were his best ammo. Yet actually worked in DW's favor.

[/QUOTE]
I’m talking about the victims not lawyers.

Can't release some "facts", then claim you're not releasing info because you don't have to. I mean, ya can, but folks will know you're a BS artist.

No one “claims” they aren’t releasing info because the appropriate time to do so is at trial.

 

[XLIX]

Again, that's not how this works.

 

[JetFan79]

That’s just not true. Sexual assault victims are the least likely victims to publicize their details outside of the court room

I’m talking about the victims not lawyers.

No one “claims” they aren’t releasing info because the appropriate time to do so is at trial.

1. Right. But often times details are released. Think Cosby. I think plenty of folks came forward with knowledge he'd drug women.

2. I'd imagine most plaintiffs will go along with what their lawyer says.

3. Then how can anyone be judging DW currently? All that exists are civil accusations with no proof.

In fact, the only things we know are the names n statements from masseuses who are defending DW. And how one of the plaintiffs previously tried to bribe DW.

 

[JetFan79]

I'm not sure where you came up with that theory

It's the NFL. All they care about is public opinion.

You killed someone? Hmmm... but fans don't care... ok you can play!

You texted a racial or homophobic joke to the wrong person? And fans are pissed! 8 game suspension.

 

[Ring 6]

1. Right. But often times details are released. Think Cosby. I think plenty of folks came forward with knowledge he'd drug women.

2. I'd imagine most plaintiffs will go along with what their lawyer says.

3. Then how can anyone be judging DW currently? All that exists are civil accusations with no proof.

In fact, the only things we know are the names n statements from masseuses who are defending DW. And how one of the plaintiffs previously tried to bribe DW.

No one should be making any judgment right now. People can have impressions and feelings about what the stories will result in, but it is ludicrous to make a judgment without all the facts.

 

[Simpelton]

3. Then how can anyone be judging DW currently? All that exists are civil accusations with no proof.

Ayep. The reek of hypocrisy from a certain number of posters in this thread is amazing. We're supposed to believe the woman's story without proof, just because no Y chromosome? No thought to simply sit tight and let the facts, and the law, fall into place? That's all I'm arguing for. That and letting the law apply equally to either sex, which DOES NOT HAPPEN if the woman is believed sight unseen.

Also my post a couple pages ago about informed risk was somewhat flippant, but pertinent. Unless I'm missing something, and I could be, Watson made no secret of what he was asking these women to do, and he wasn't forcing them to do it at all. This isn't Bill Cosby and his date rape drugs. This wasn't a bait-and-switch. This was "this is the service I'd like you to provide and here's what I'm prepared to pay."

Massaging a man's groin is going to provoke certain obvious physical responses from the man, and assuming none of these women are rookies in their profession, if they didn't know this might happen they probably should have. Even if they were rookies, and virgins, unless they went through their lives with cotton in their ears, certain facts about the male species should have been made clear to them long before they began their professional lives.

It should not have come as a surprise that performing the actions Watson allegedly had them perform, which we'll simply refer to as rhythmic stimulation of the extreme lower thorax, would provoke the symptoms of sexual arousal. Most men figure that one out by the time they're 15 or so, much to the disgust of the next person to have to clean up the bathroom (and before we continue, let me just say yes, and beyond that, let me add that I also have 4 brothers, and we all spent a roughly equal proportion of our lives as idiot teenagers). This is not a secret, this is not some new discovery, the knowledge of the phenomenon is hardly uncommon, and it'd take a pretty incompetent masseuse to be unaware of it.

With that said, I'm going to need to see some specifics before I decide whether this might have been an informed consensual arrangement, or whether it was something more sinister. Assuming as I am that they accepted payment for their services, that's another factor to consider, and an important one.

 

[Simpelton]

What I said to you is an accurate depiction of your attitude. You have from the start blamed the victim,

See, this is where you fall on your head.

At the moment we have no evidence that Watson is not himself the victim.

I'm sorry, I've seen my share of horror stories that spring from false claims. Waiting and seeing, and pointing out that we're short on evidence that a crime even took place much less happened as tweeted, isn't blaming the victim. It's what happens when people are conscious of the right of both accuser and accused and want to let the system work before crucifying a man for being accused of stuff.

 

[Joker]

The Patriots are not trading for Watson, Stumblebumton..wake the **** up

 

[Deus Irae]

It's the NFL. All they care about is public opinion.

You killed someone? Hmmm... but fans don't care... ok you can play!

You texted a racial or homophobic joke to the wrong person? And fans are pissed! 8 game suspension.

The civil courts in Texas are the NFL now?

 

[Ring 6]

See, this is where you fall on your head.

At the moment we have no evidence that Watson is not himself the victim.

I'm sorry, I've seen my share of horror stories that spring from false claims. Waiting and seeing, and pointing out that we're short on evidence that a crime even took place much less happened as tweeted, isn't blaming the victim. It's what happens when people are conscious of the right of both accuser and accused and want to let the system work before crucifying a man for being accused of stuff.

Watson has been accused of serious issues by many women.
You, rather than having empathy for the women have have consistently implied they are lying. You have no facts that would support that. You have consistently taken the approach that woman are lying bltches and if they agree to massage him and the massage includes the groin area (which is norms all) they abandon any rights. You literally said a masseuse who accepts money has consented to sex unless she gives the money back. You have not backed down from that.
I get it. You hate women. I assume there is a deep psychological reason behind that. But it’s just creepy that you are spending this much time trashing these women in support of a man you have never met.
Its 2021 you should throttle that hate a little bit.

 

[Ring 6]

Ayep. The reek of hypocrisy from a certain number of posters in this thread is amazing. We're supposed to believe the woman's story without proof, just because no Y chromosome? No thought to simply sit tight and let the facts, and the law, fall into place? That's all I'm arguing for. That and letting the law apply equally to either sex, which DOES NOT HAPPEN if the woman is believed sight unseen.

Also my post a couple pages ago about informed risk was somewhat flippant, but pertinent. Unless I'm missing something, and I could be, Watson made no secret of what he was asking these women to do, and he wasn't forcing them to do it at all. This isn't Bill Cosby and his date rape drugs. This wasn't a bait-and-switch. This was "this is the service I'd like you to provide and here's what I'm prepared to pay."

Massaging a man's groin is going to provoke certain obvious physical responses from the man, and assuming none of these women are rookies in their profession, if they didn't know this might happen they probably should have. Even if they were rookies, and virgins, unless they went through their lives with cotton in their ears, certain facts about the male species should have been made clear to them long before they began their professional lives.

It should not have come as a surprise that performing the actions Watson allegedly had them perform, which we'll simply refer to as rhythmic stimulation of the extreme lower thorax, would provoke the symptoms of sexual arousal. Most men figure that one out by the time they're 15 or so, much to the disgust of the next person to have to clean up the bathroom (and before we continue, let me just say yes, and beyond that, let me add that I also have 4 brothers, and we all spent a roughly equal proportion of our lives as idiot teenagers). This is not a secret, this is not some new discovery, the knowledge of the phenomenon is hardly uncommon, and it'd take a pretty incompetent masseuse to be unaware of it.

With that said, I'm going to need to see some specifics before I decide whether this might have been an informed consensual arrangement, or whether it was something more sinister. Assuming as I am that they accepted payment for their services, that's another factor to consider, and an important one.

No one had said they believe the women without proof. You have trashed them and implied they are liars without proof.
Their services are massage. It would seem you feel you would prematurely complete a sexual act if a woman touched you below the waist but that is not how normal men are.

 

[Simpelton]

Watson has been accused of serious issues by many women.

Exactly. He has been accused. Nothing more. Nothing less. An accusation without proof isn't worth the air it's printed on

You, rather than having empathy for the women have have consistently implied they are lying. You have no facts that would support that. You have consistently taken the approach that woman are lying bltches and if they agree to massage him and the massage includes the groin area (which is norms all) they abandon any rights.

Wow. I might just have to show this comment to modern medical science. This is levels of self-deception I'm not sure the world has actually seen before.

For the record, this is a bald faced lie. What I said is that action such as the action to take payment, and the action of agreeing to perform the work, represents consent.

You literally said a masseuse who accepts money has consented to sex unless she gives the money back.

That's another bold faced lie. I never said anything about having sex at all. Assuming you can read at at least a second grade level, you know this. Your credibility is declining by the word here.


What I said was, how could anyone with common sense actually think a groin massage would not be sexually triggering? As in, this is something women who perform work of that nature might be seen to accept as a common risk of the job that they either know or ought to know was possible when they do work of this nature. And that's what the masseuses coming in on Watson's side seem to be also saying which is why their testimony is important.

And since Watson was not beating about the bush (metaphorically speaking) that if they didn't want to do work of this nature all they had to do was turn down his money. If they don't do that, then the burden of proof is on them to find a way to prove nonconsent.

Moreover I can't even find any evidence that Watson propositioned any of the masseuses to do anything more than their jobs, although I'd happily walk that back if you find one that says otherwise. Assuming you've actually read any of the relevant information, which being the first guy in the entire thread to bring up full-on boot knocking, kinda suggests maybe you haven't.

You have not backed down from that.

No, I have not backed down from your frankly borderline slanderous accusations. Although I'm pretty sure you'd like me to. Your response to me standing up to the stupidity, arrogance and egotism of your personal attacks is to double down on the stupid arrogant egotistical attacks. you are not doing yourself any favors right now and should consider taking a hiatus from this thread if you can't stay civil.