Buffalo_Stampede Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 2 minutes ago, Scott7975 said: Why would you hope she found a scumbag innocent? Do you not understand that civil court and criminal court have two different standards? It’s not difficult to get an indictment especially with dozens of strangers with similar accusations. They probably all settle at the end of the day but he definitely should’ve been formally charged. The whole thing is sickening.
Scott7975 Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said: It’s not difficult to get an indictment especially with dozens of strangers with similar accusations. They probably all settle at the end of the day but he definitely should’ve been formally charged. The whole thing is sickening. People dont get indicted often based on he said she said. Sexual misconduct cases are probably some of the toughest to prosecute. Most woman dont even bother because they end up being dragged through the mud in court. Ive seen your comments throughout the threads and the way you write seems to indicate that you want to believe Watson did nothing wrong but try to hide that because you are afraid of what people will think of you. Thats honestly what I get from all your posts. Such as the one above where you say " I was hoping the arbitrator would look at the evidence and say she didn’t see any evidence of sexual misconduct." Why would you say that? Why would you hope the arbitrator found he did nothing wrong? Edited August 2, 2022 by Scott7975 1
Buffalo_Stampede Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 2 minutes ago, GoBills808 said: The precedent was Roethisberger, by rights Watson should have gotten 300+ games. And the judge should understand that times are different. She actually makes a case that public pressure is the reason why the NFL wanted a year. Honestly it sounded like she was talking about cancel culture. She picked a terrible time to make a point about cancel culture. She had an opportunity to set her own precedent. This is a new system. She reviewed the evidence and felt Watson did it all, to multiple women. She failed. 1 minute ago, Scott7975 said: People dont get indicted often based on he said she said. Sexual misconduct cases are probably some of the toughest to prosecute. Most woman dont even bother because they end up being dragged through the mud in court. In this case there dozens of accusations. All similar. It was a slam dunk indictment.
Scott7975 Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said: And the judge should understand that times are different. She actually makes a case that public pressure is the reason why the NFL wanted a year. Honestly it sounded like she was talking about cancel culture. She picked a terrible time to make a point about cancel culture. She had an opportunity to set her own precedent. This is a new system. She reviewed the evidence and felt Watson did it all, to multiple women. She failed. In this case there dozens of accusations. All similar. It was a slam dunk indictment. Dozens of he said she said doesnt turn into a smoking gun in criminal court. Those courts work and convict on evidence. Word of mouth is not evidence.
Warcodered Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 1 minute ago, Scott7975 said: Dozens of he said she said doesnt turn into a smoking gun in criminal court. Those courts work and convict on evidence. Word of mouth is not evidence. This wasn't a criminal court.
GunnerBill Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 20 minutes ago, Dr. Who said: I hope he does double it. No idea about legal reasoning, but I suspect that is closer to what the majority of people believe is merited by his actions insofar as it applies to his NFL career. I agree. But, and I know I am a fundamentalist about this, the law is no place for emotion. You establish a process with a judge involved you should expect cold hearted, dispassionate, application of legal principle and precedent. Because that is their job. Goodell can still intervene and I think he will. But this is HIS process that he and his client journalists lauded as a great new dawn for NFL discipline.
Scott7975 Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 1 minute ago, Warcodered said: This wasn't a criminal court. He is talking about not understanding why Watson didnt get indicted... which would be criminal.
Buffalo_Stampede Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 Just now, Scott7975 said: Dozens of he said she said doesnt turn into a smoking gun in criminal court. Those courts work and convict on evidence. Word of mouth is not evidence. Come on man. If you had 20 accusations of sexual assault where would you be right now?
Scott7975 Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said: Come on man. If you had 20 accusations of sexual assault where would you be right now? Probably committing suicide for being a scumbag. People dont get criminal convictions based off accusations. Some dont even get convicted when there is proof. Woman get dragged through the mud... oh she was drunk and partying and first acted like she wanted it. Why dont you look up how many rapes actually happen, which is more severe than what Watson did, versus how many of the rapists actually go to jail. Im not saying any of this is right. It isn't. But its the way the world works. People dont go to jail based on he said she said. At least not mostly. If they did then there would also be innocent people flooding jail cells because there are other types of scumbags out there too. Edited August 2, 2022 by Scott7975
Warcodered Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 2 minutes ago, Scott7975 said: He is talking about not understanding why Watson didnt get indicted... which would be criminal. Okay yeah that makes sense. With how easy people say it is for a DA to get an indictment from a grand jury I do wonder if they were aiming for a middle ground or something. Taking it to the grand jury to show they weren't being lenient to a pro athlete, but not actually wanting it to go to trial.
Scott7975 Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 1 minute ago, Warcodered said: Okay yeah that makes sense. With how easy people say it is for a DA to get an indictment from a grand jury I do wonder if they were aiming for a middle ground or something. Taking it to the grand jury to show they weren't being lenient to a pro athlete, but not actually wanting it to go to trial. The whole thing is disgusting to me. A lot of disgusting things get swept under the rug in this world. People move on and forget. Some people are powerful enough to even get government assistance. The government themselves are scummy. Its just the way the world works. Like just this instance... Watson is bad PR for the NFL right now. At the end of the day is that bad PR really going to matter? Nope because people will still want to watch football and they aren't going to lose any money. If that were not the case then Watson would probably never see the football field again and have his entire contract ripped up. Thats the truth of the world.
Buffalo_Stampede Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 2 minutes ago, Scott7975 said: Probably committing suicide for being a scumbag. People dont get criminal convictions based off accusations. Some dont even get convicted when there is proof. Woman get dragged through the mud... oh she was drunk and partying and first acted like she wanted it. Why dont you look up how many rapes actually happen, which is more severe than what Watson did, versus how many of the rapists actually go to jail. Im not saying any of this is right. It isn't. But its the way the world works. People dont go to jail based on he said she said. At least not mostly. If they did then there would also be innocent people flooding jail cells because there are other types of scumbags out there too. I get what you’re saying. The whole point is the number of women. I read quotes from a prosecutor somewhere saying the similarities between each accusation should’ve made it a slam dunk indictment. The women is the evidence.
Scott7975 Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 Just now, Buffalo_Stampede said: I get what you’re saying. The whole point is the number of women. I read quotes from a prosecutor somewhere saying the similarities between each accusation should’ve made it a slam dunk indictment. The women is the evidence. It may seem that way but its still not the way things work. This is the way civil cases work. Criminal court = beyond any reasonable doubt Civil court = is it more likely than not That might not seem like a big difference but the difference is huge.
Buffalo_Stampede Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 Just now, Scott7975 said: It may seem that way but its still not the way things work. This is the way civil cases work. Criminal court = beyond any reasonable doubt Civil court = is it more likely than not That might not seem like a big difference but the difference is huge. I know that. Indictment and conviction are also vey different.
Scott7975 Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 Just now, Buffalo_Stampede said: I know that. Indictment and conviction are also vey different. https://www.cleveland.com/court-justice/2022/04/why-wasnt-deshaun-watson-charged-what-prosecutors-needed-to-file-charges.html I mean, I am not going to sit here and go in circles with you all day.
K-9 Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 12 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said: Not surprised in the least. Robinson’s own language in her ruling defies the lenient penalty she issued. She gave Goodell a hammer.
JoPoy88 Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 32 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said: Ew. geez. Not the headline i’d have gone with.
Mr. WEO Posted August 2, 2022 Posted August 2, 2022 Her reasoning is incredibly dumb: “NFL is attempting to impose a more dramatic shift in its culture without the benefit of fair notice to – and consistency of consequence – for those in the NFL subject to the Policy. 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.” How on earth is the NFL supposed to anticipate every way in which its players can potentially and serially abuse others, so that they can't print out a suspension schedule for this or that? She states his abuse was unprecedented in NFL annals,.....yet says he only gets the 6 gamer because, you know, he didn't know he might suspended for more. She accuses the NFL of changing its culture....without fair notice!!! 8 minutes ago, JoPoy88 said: geez. Not the headline i’d have gone with. Come on---that team went 2 full seasons with only one victory! These scumbag Haslams will take this W 1
Recommended Posts