• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Deshaun Watson Off the Field Thread v2

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

How many games will Deshaun Watson be suspended?

  • <4

    Votes: 6 4.3%

  • 4

    Votes: 9 6.5%

  • 6

    Votes: 36 26.1%

  • 8

    Votes: 41 29.7%

  • 10

    Votes: 8 5.8%

  • 12

    Votes: 4 2.9%

  • Full season

    Votes: 22 15.9%

  • More than one season

    Votes: 12 8.7%
  • Total voters
    138
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
SuperSurge said:
I said if I were the judge and the NFL appealed my decision, I'd quit, and I would. But I'm not the judge.

To be a retired federal judge who spent months on my first case, deciding the most reasonable punishment, writing 16 pages explaining how I came to the decision only to have the people that hired me tell me I'm wrong 36 hours later and throw out my decision... Yeah, I'm out. I have better things to do.

Just my opinion.
Click to expand...

Probably, until you realize how much they’re probably paying her to do it.
 
CBBI said:
And I’m not saying she did this intentionally, but I think Judge Robinson ultimately set up a very easy appeal justification for the NFL with several bits of language within her report.

This is an ultimate generalization, but basically Sue said…

1. Watson is guilty of everything the NFL accused him of doing.

2. What Watson did would deserve a harsher penalty if the NFL had previously established one.

Based on those two things alone, I think the NFL has an easy case to appeal under the guise of “The independent arbiter believes the player is guilty and feels his actions are worth being punished more. However, we disagree with the arbiter and feel we don’t need to have established punishment standards when it comes to unprecedented and egregious (the arbiter’s own wording) actions by a player.”

My guess is at the NFL’s stance in the appeal would be something along the lines of “even if we had established a punishment standard for non-violent sexual allegations, the sheer magnitude of credible accusations in this case would have superseded those standards anyway”

Just my two cents.
Click to expand...

She literally never ONCE said Watson is guilty of everything the NFL said he did.

Where is this coming from?

She said his case is the worse than previous but that is likely based strictly on the sheer number of accusers.

That was completely just your own reading between the lines BS.
 
Triplethreat said:
She literally never ONCE said Watson is guilty of everything the NFL said he did.

Where is this coming from?

She said his case is the worse than previous but that is likely based strictly on the sheer number of accusers.

That was completely just your own reading between the lines BS.
Click to expand...

You might want to re-read it pal.

Page 8
And he engaged in this pattern of conduct multiple times. I find this sufficient circumstantial evidence to support the NFL’s contention not only that contact occurred, but that Mr. Watson was aware that contact probably would occur, and that Mr. Watson had a sexual purpose – not just a therapeutic purpose – in making these arrangements with these particular therapists.27 Finally, I find that the NFL has produced sufficient circumstantial evidence to prove the last prong of the test, that Mr. Watson knew such sexualized contact was unwanted.

Page 9
I, therefore, find that the NFL has carried its burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Mr. Watson engaged in sexual assault (as defined by the NFL) against the four therapists identified in the Report.29 Mr. Watson violated the Policy in this regard.

Page 10
Based on the NFL’s broad interpretation of this prohibited conduct as reflected in the evidence it chose to present, I find that the NFL has carried its burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Mr. Watson’s conduct posed a genuine danger to the safety and well-being of another person.

Page 11
Regardless of my findings, it is apparent that Mr. Watson acted with a reckless disregard for the consequences of his actions by exposing himself (and the NFL) to such public scrutiny and speculation. Mr. Watson’s predatory conduct cast “a negative light on the League and its players,”39 sufficient proof that he violated this provision of the Policy

Judge Robinson literally, I mean literally - it is right above for you to read, laid out that Watson actually did every single thing the NFL suggested he did that violated the personal conduct policy.

 
CBBI said:
You might want to re-read it pal.

Page 8
And he engaged in this pattern of conduct multiple times. I find this sufficient circumstantial evidence to support the NFL’s contention not only that contact occurred, but that Mr. Watson was aware that contact probably would occur, and that Mr. Watson had a sexual purpose – not just a therapeutic purpose – in making these arrangements with these particular therapists.27 Finally, I find that the NFL has produced sufficient circumstantial evidence to prove the last prong of the test, that Mr. Watson knew such sexualized contact was unwanted.

Page 9
I, therefore, find that the NFL has carried its burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Mr. Watson engaged in sexual assault (as defined by the NFL) against the four therapists identified in the Report.29 Mr. Watson violated the Policy in this regard.

Page 10
Based on the NFL’s broad interpretation of this prohibited conduct as reflected in the evidence it chose to present, I find that the NFL has carried its burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Mr. Watson’s conduct posed a genuine danger to the safety and well-being of another person.

Page 11
Regardless of my findings, it is apparent that Mr. Watson acted with a reckless disregard for the consequences of his actions by exposing himself (and the NFL) to such public scrutiny and speculation. Mr. Watson’s predatory conduct cast “a negative light on the League and its players,”39 sufficient proof that he violated this provision of the Policy

Judge Robinson literally, I mean literally it is right above for you to read, that Watson violated every single thing the NFL laid out that he violated.

Click to expand...
dumpster-man.gif
 
CBBI said:
And I’m not saying she did this intentionally, but I think Judge Robinson ultimately set up a very easy appeal justification for the NFL with several bits of language within her report.

This is an ultimate generalization, but basically Sue said…

1. Watson is guilty of everything the NFL accused him of doing.

2. What Watson did would deserve a harsher penalty if the NFL had previously established one.

Based on those two things alone, I think the NFL has an easy case to appeal under the guise of “The independent arbiter believes the player is guilty and feels his actions are worth being punished more. However, we disagree with the arbiter and feel we don’t need to have established punishment standards when it comes to unprecedented and egregious (the arbiter’s own wording) actions by a player.”

My guess is at the NFL’s stance in the appeal would be something along the lines of “even if we had established a punishment standard for non-violent sexual allegations, the sheer magnitude of credible accusations in this case would have superseded those standards anyway”

Just my two cents.
Click to expand...
I can see how some people might come to this conclusion but I respectfully disagree. She outlines why in her conclusion. She outright says:

“While it may be entirely appropriate to more severely discipline players for non-violent sexual conduct, I do not believe it is appropriate to do so without notice of the extraordinary change this position portends for the NFL and its players.”

“Similarly, the concepts of “unfairness” and “selectivity” demand notice in this case. Although I have found Mr. Watson to have violated the Policy, I have done so using the NFL’s post-hoc definitions of the prohibited conduct at issue. Defining prohibited conduct plays a critical role in the rule of law, enabling people to predict the consequences of their behavior. It is inherently unfair to identify conduct as prohibited only after the conduct has been committed, just as it is inherently unjust to change the penalties for such conduct after the fact”

The NFL has no way of adequately addressing this part if they appeal. No notice was given, no league memo was sent pertaining to this kind of conduct...they would be applying a harsher and more severe penalty after the fact, and that’s wrong.
 
Triplethreat said:
Lol proven guilty by the NFL but not by Buzbee in the criminal court of law.

Sure pal.
Click to expand...
First time seeing a case not get convicted criminally, but then get found responsible in a civil suit?

I always assumed you were old enough to remember the OJ trial--guess not.



Edit: As @Jack Brickman pointed out, Buzbee's cases were civil suits to begin with. Nearly all of them have been settled out of court, so there isn't even a ruling on them. I shouldn't have accepted the premise of the person I responded to.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-15: "Cavs Survive and Advance"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:15: Cavs Survive and Advance
Top