Deshaun Watson admits under oath that Ashley Solis cried at the end of the massage

[wppete]

This is completely insane!!!

 

A 24th sexual misconduct lawsuit has been filed against Cleveland Browns QB Deshaun Watson, and it contains some of the most graphic allegations the player has faced yet.

https://www.breitbart.com/sports/2022/06/07/deshaun-watson-accused-of-ejaculating-on-massage-therapist-in-24th-lawsuit/

 

 

 

 

[aristocrat]

10 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

A traffic violation shouldn’t get you arrested unless you’re committing a crime.

 

So no you’re not correct. The only reason Kraft escaped punishment from the league is because the video wasn’t allowed as evidence. 
 

 

Oh you can get arrested for reckless driving for excessive speeding. Yes, Kraft got off of punishment because the evidence was tossed. Had the evidence been allowed in and Kraft convicted he likely would have gotten a fine and maybe a lost draft pick but I doubt even that. 

12 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Where is the duty on the Texans to disclose those things? Unless there is something I am not aware of in the NFL rulebook there is no requirement on them to do so.

 

From what I understand there was a discussion that the lawsuits up to the date of the trade were agreed were the only ones to exist. The browns are stupid but you have to think they included some language in the contract and the trade to protect themselves. Or maybe they were the only team that didn't and are now screwed. 

[Captain Hindsight]

1 hour ago, aristocrat said:

 

If the Texans didn't disclose the NDA and other things they may have known about the Browns could make this ugly. There are still 23, 24 firsts and some other picks so send those back to the Browns and ban Watson from the league. Story over. Texans still make out with the picks they had this year. 

I doubt Watson gets banned, but I could see an indefinite suspension with a chance to reapply after a year. Gives the NFL more time to make a call and possibly extend a suspension 

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

 

From what I understand there was a discussion that the lawsuits up to the date of the trade were agreed were the only ones to exist. The browns are stupid but you have to think they included some language in the contract and the trade to protect themselves. Or maybe they were the only team that didn't and are now screwed. 

 

They are allowed to make contractual protections against Watson, sure, i.e. he owes money back if it transpires he was aware of things he did not disclose but I am pretty sure they are not allowed to make similar provisions in the terms of the trade. The only thing they could have done is make the 1st rounders in future years conditional on Watson playing (so for example, the 2023 first is condition that Watson plays at least 6 games in 2022 otherwise it becomes a 3rd and the 2024 first is conditional on Watson playing 14 games otherwise it becomes a 4th or something like that), but the reality is they wouldn't have got him if they did that because there were other teams willing to give up the picks. The reason the Browns won the sweepstake in the end was the contract with Watson. But as far as I am aware, unless someone can point me in the direction of a rule that contradicts it my understanding is you can't make an entire trade conditional on X once it is signed off and approved by the NFL. 

12 minutes ago, Captain Hindsight said:

I doubt Watson gets banned, but I could see an indefinite suspension with a chance to reapply after a year. Gives the NFL more time to make a call and possibly extend a suspension 

 

So while the policy has been tweaked since a similar "indefinite suspension" was ruled beyond the scope of the policy in the Ray Rice case. 

[May Day 10]

I really like Cleveland sports teams as the fans are cut from the same cloth as us.  

 

 

But man, the browns organization deserves all this.  what stupidity

[Buffalo_Stampede]

18 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

 

Oh you can get arrested for reckless driving for excessive speeding. Yes, Kraft got off of punishment because the evidence was tossed. Had the evidence been allowed in and Kraft convicted he likely would have gotten a fine and maybe a lost draft pick but I doubt even that. 

 

From what I understand there was a discussion that the lawsuits up to the date of the trade were agreed were the only ones to exist. The browns are stupid but you have to think they included some language in the contract and the trade to protect themselves. Or maybe they were the only team that didn't and are now screwed. 

And I’m not saying the punishment should be equal either. But the Watson stuff came out a few months after the Kraft case ended. Let’s also remember what Watson’s lawyer just said. No crime in a happy ending.

 

There are similarities. Watsons group is saying it was all consensual.

[Captain Hindsight]

7 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

 

 

So while the policy has been tweaked since a similar "indefinite suspension" was ruled beyond the scope of the policy in the Ray Rice case. 

Ah I hadn't realized that but it makes sense 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

4 minutes ago, May Day 10 said:

I really like Cleveland sports teams as the fans are cut from the same cloth as us.  

 

 

But man, the browns organization deserves all this.  what stupidity

Do they not remind you of the Sabres a little bit? Tanking, then excitement, then complete implosion. 

[Captain Hindsight]

3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Do they not remind you of the Sabres a little bit? Tanking, then excitement, then complete implosion. 

They were a Chad Henne two yard pass away from an AFC Championship appearance 2 years ago. Now they have some serious questions marks and a black cloud over the franchise

 

Glad they passed on Allen

[HappyDays]

29 minutes ago, Captain Hindsight said:

I doubt Watson gets banned, but I could see an indefinite suspension with a chance to reapply after a year. Gives the NFL more time to make a call and possibly extend a suspension 

 

Mike Florio speculated if the league really wants to set an example they could suspend him with pay for the 2022 season pending the conclusion of the civil suits, then suspend him without pay for the 2023 season after all the lawsuits are settled or decided in court. He would effectively be out of football for 3 years and the Browns would be a laughingstock.

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Mike Florio speculated if the league really wants to set an example they could suspend him with pay for the 2022 season pending the conclusion of the civil suits, then suspend him without pay for the 2023 season after all the lawsuits are settled or decided in court. He would effectively be out of football for 3 years and the Browns would be a laughingstock.

 

I know Florio has speculated this and I know he is a former attorney, but I'm not sure it is as simple as that. Florio and I have a different reading of just how insulated the new NFL discipline process is from the courts. My question would be what is the justification for suspending him with pay for 2022 when you did not do that for 2021 while there was still the prospect of possible criminal charges? The NFL's only rationale for that would be "well he wasn't going to play last year" but the discipline policy is clear you have to discipline a player for a breach of the policy not for a change in the stance on playing. Of course the NFL could say "ah well we didn't suspend him last year because the investigation was ongoing, it is now concluded so we will suspend him on full pay for the 2022 season." But the precedent from the Ray Rice arbitration is pretty clear that they would then need fresh evidence to levy a further penalty next spring after the civil suits (you can't be hit with two lots of discipline for the same offense). Now of course the NFL could do it anyway and proceed on the basis that it would be a bad look for Watson and his lawyers to challenge whether the discipline is ultra-vires of the conduct policy, that is an option. Or even if they did it and Watson and his team challenged the NFL might be able to persuade a court that it all sits within the bounds of the Commissioner's discretion and as long as it does they have cart blanche to do basically whatever they want. 

 

It goes back to my point higher up the thread. The NFL should have suspended him with full pay (i.e. the Commssioner's exempt list) immediately last spring and been willing to leave him there until the legal process had concluded. They could still have done their own investigation in the meantime and have been ready to go with league discipline if required the moment the legal process had ended. I'm not sure why they didn't and they have left themselves in a position where there is certainly an arguable case against them if they now take the Florio route. 

[BuffaloRebound]

24 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Mike Florio speculated if the league really wants to set an example they could suspend him with pay for the 2022 season pending the conclusion of the civil suits, then suspend him without pay for the 2023 season after all the lawsuits are settled or decided in court. He would effectively be out of football for 3 years and the Browns would be a laughingstock.

This would make sense especially since his base salary is only $1m for 2022.  

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, BuffaloRebound said:

This would make sense especially since his base salary is only $1m for 2022.  

 

It is definitely the neatest solution. Just not sure practically, within the parameters of the conduct policy it is that easy to get to. 

[Royale with Cheese]

 

[HappyDays]

24 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I know Florio has speculated this and I know he is a former attorney, but I'm not sure it is as simple as that. Florio and I have a different reading of just how insulated the new NFL discipline process is from the courts. My question would be what is the justification for suspending him with pay for 2022 when you did not do that for 2021 while there was still the prospect of possible criminal charges? The NFL's only rationale for that would be "well he wasn't going to play last year" but the discipline policy is clear you have to discipline a player for a breach of the policy not for a change in the stance on playing. Of course the NFL could say "ah well we didn't suspend him last year because the investigation was ongoing, it is now concluded so we will suspend him on full pay for the 2022 season." But the precedent from the Ray Rice arbitration is pretty clear that they would then need fresh evidence to levy a further penalty next spring after the civil suits (you can't be hit with two lots of discipline for the same offense). Now of course the NFL could do it anyway and proceed on the basis that it would be a bad look for Watson and his lawyers to challenge whether the discipline is ultra-vires of the conduct policy, that is an option. Or even if they did it and Watson and his team challenged the NFL might be able to persuade a court that it all sits within the bounds of the Commissioner's discretion and as long as it does they have cart blanche to do basically whatever they want. 

 

It goes back to my point higher up the thread. The NFL should have suspended him with full pay (i.e. the Commssioner's exempt list) immediately last spring and been willing to leave him there until the legal process had concluded. They could still have done their own investigation in the meantime and have been ready to go with league discipline if required the moment the legal process had ended. I'm not sure why they didn't and they have left themselves in a position where there is certainly an arguable case against them if they now take the Florio route. 

 

I think you answered it yourself. They could just say they were waiting for more information before doing anything. The NFL definitely used Watson's holdout last year to their advantage in this situation but they never officially stated that. They have the authority to now suspend him with pay pending the outcome of all the civil suits, then pass the suspension without pay once they conclude. I don't see any way Watson's team could dispute that given the broad authority handed to the commissioner by the NFLPA.

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I think you answered it yourself. They could just say they were waiting for more information before doing anything. The NFL definitely used Watson's holdout last year to their advantage in this situation but they never officially stated that. They have the authority to now suspend him with pay pending the outcome of all the civil suits, then pass the suspension without pay once they conclude. I don't see any way Watson's team could dispute that given the broad authority handed to the commissioner by the NFLPA.

 

The bolded is where we disagree. I would argue if I were his Counsel that equates to two suspensions for the same offense and the case law from the independent arbitration on Ray Rice suggests that is beyond the scope of the very broad discretion the commissioner has. Now the process has changed since Ray Rice with the independent investigator meaning Goodell is no longer the judge, jury and executioner - a position that both the Rice arbitration and the Deflategate litigation ruled unjustifiable, but the NFL would still, based on my reading of the case law and understanding of the revised process, have to at least hold a second investigation and find some additional grounds for the suspension. It is possible that something comes out in the civil cases that didn't form part of the original investigation and gives them an in to do that. But that also isn't a given. 

 

I still think the NFL made the wrong call last year when he should immediately have gone on the exempt list. I suspect if they had their time back again that is what they would do. 

[aristocrat]

 

[BillsFan4]

20 hours ago, HappyDays said:

Hoo boy.

 

 

What excuse will the people saying “it’s all about the money” use now that more women are coming forward who aren’t suing him?

 

70-100 different massage therapists in a 17 month period. All women, not one man. Some aren’t even massage therapists.

 

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

[Royale with Cheese]

[GunnerBill]

5 hours ago, aristocrat said:

 

 

I can do that position.