Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

This late in the game says it's about money to me 

 

The 23rd plaintiff is seeking the minimum compensation. She just wants Watson to be held accountable. What's your excuse now?

 

Also it isn't about believing all 23 women. If even 1 is telling the truth he should be punished. Did you watch Ashley Solis's interview?

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The Wiz said:

Was more referring to the possibility of him being charged with indecent exposure instead of sexual harassment/assault but thanks for your feedback. 

 

   Well the problem is there are no witnesses to the sessions.  Seems like Watson insists no others be present.  He can hardly claim modesty if he's exposing himself to over 50 different massuesses.  

 

   If a child with no knowledge of guns somehow caused a gun to fire killing the family dog doesn't mean the child is an animal abusers but they still are guilty of killing the dog, though it was accidental.  I know if the child was traumatized by that accident I'd insist on some counseling by a psychologist because that type if trauma can be just as dangerous as possible brain damage causing the lack of control.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Gene1973 said:

And people need to realize the court of public opinion is not how our justice system works.

 

The NFL's personal conduct policy is not the justice system. We're over a year into this process and still making the same tired arguments. Watch Ashley Solis's interview and judge for yourself.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

So now a 23rd woman decides to file suit this far into the process and people actually believe ALL these women? People might say "she could have been afraid to come out about it" but 22 women already said something, so what would she have been afraid of? This late in the game says it's about money to me 

She wasn't afraid of anything. She said that his smug attitude acting like he's done nothing wrong is what pushed her to come forward also. She also has some pretty damning testimony as well if they can somehow trace the $$$ she says was paid to the owner of the business to send women his way. She's also going for the minimum compensation. If it were, say, 3-5 women I could see it being a $$$ grab. But 23 and talk of a 24th? This guy is a sleazy sexual predator who thought his fame and $$$ would never allow him to be caught. I hope he never takes another snap in the NFL and justice is served for these women, financially or whatever. 

Edited by H2o
  • Like (+1) 6
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been one to sort of reserve judgment and watch this from a distance with curiosity as to how it would all play out.  But I finally watched the Real Sports segment last night and Ms. Solis came across as HIGHLY BELIEVABLE and clearly exhibiting the behaviors of someone who was suffering from serious emotional trauma.  After watching that I'm not sure how anyone could come away thinking that Deshaun Watson did not cross the line and do something seriously wrong during his interactions with Ms. Solis.  I don't remember much from Crim Law, but it would seem some of his alleged behavior waded into actual sexual assault territory.  I would not be shocked by a Trevor Bauer length suspension at this point.

 

Edit:  Also, if you value your humanity, do not click the link to the Cleveland Browns fan forum thread.  It's the most disgusting thing I've read in quite some time.  

Edited by TheBrownBear
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

The NFL's personal conduct policy is not the justice system. We're over a year into this process and still making the same tired arguments. Watch Ashley Solis's interview and judge for yourself.

 

And exactly what actual facts does the NFL personal conduct policy have to work with to levy punishment? No criminal charges, no evidence other than believe the woman scenario. 

 

I don't see how they can hand out a suspension with zero actual evidence.

 

Oh, and go Johnny Depp!

 

Quote

Ms. Solis came across as HIGHLY BELIEVABLE and clearly exhibiting the behaviors of someone who was suffering from serious emotional trauma. 

 

Some UFO witnesses can sound highly believable as well...

Edited by Gene1973
  • Eyeroll 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheBrownBear said:

I've been one to sort of reserve judgment and watch this from a distance with curiosity as to how it would all play out.  But I finally watched the Real Sports segment last night and Ms. Solis came across as HIGHLY BELIEVABLE and clearly exhibiting the behaviors of someone who was suffering from serious emotional trauma.  After watching that I'm not sure how anyone could come away thinking that Deshaun Watson did not cross the line and do something seriously wrong during his interactions with Ms. Solis.  I don't remember much from Crim Law, but it would seem some of his alleged behavior waded into actual sexual assault territory.  I would not be shocked by a Trevor Bauer length suspension at this point.

I will tell you what. I stayed at a motel 8 last night and watched the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard case, I agree with this statement.

  • Vomit 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gene1973 said:

And exactly what actual facts does the NFL personal conduct policy have to work with to levy punishment?

 

Okay I see this is your first time wading into the discussion. Do a little research. Not gonna do all the work for you. Watch Ashley Solis's interview and tell me truthfully if you believe her or not. Then consider that 20+ other women are accusing him of the same thing.

 

For Watson to be totally innocent, three things have to be true:

 

1) Ashley Solis is one of the greatest actresses in the world.

2) 20+ women are all lying about the same thing.

3) Deshaun Watson pursued dozens of massage therapists all over Houston for totally innocent reasons.

 

I've decided it is plainly ridiculous that all 3 of those statements can be true. I'll take the simple explanation - Watson is a predator that put women into vulnerable situations and took advantage of them. That's the only explanation that makes any logical sense in light of everything we know about the case.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

She said last year that she didn’t want her name out there publically, which was required for the civil cases by the defense, but decided to move forward. 

 

  And it's because Watson is denying anything improper occurred.  No witnesses besides Watson and each of the women.  I myself just wonder why they didn't insist on a 3rd party to be in the room or at very least I'd think one of them would have thought to set up a video camera and when he demands a NDA signed I'd have told him only if you sign this release for the video I have of our session.  Heck I'd have put in fine print that the session may be recorded on a billing statement he would need to sign for the session.  I doubt he'd have bothered reading that fine print and would just signed to get his party started as he would have expected if he was doing these acts.  Then let him deny what you have video proof of.   

 

 

 

 

  

Edited by AuntieEm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Okay I see this is your first time wading into the discussion. Do a little research. Not gonna do all the work for you. Watch Ashley Solis's interview and tell me truthfully if you believe her or not. Then consider that 20+ other women are accusing him of the same thing.

 

For Watson to be totally innocent, three things have to be true:

 

1) Ashley Solis is one of the greatest actresses in the world.

2) 20+ women are all lying about the same thing.

3) Deshaun Watson pursued dozens of massage therapists all over Houston for totally innocent reasons.

 

I've decided it is plainly ridiculous that all 3 of those statements can be true. I'll take the simple explanation - Watson is a predator that put women into vulnerable situations and took advantage of them. That's the only explanation that makes any logical sense in light of everything we know about the case.

4)Those 20+ women have somehow held to that story for over a year.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really wonder how Watson's teammates feel about him...if they had to be honest.  Unfortunately, we won't know until he is out of the league.  There are a lot of dollars being paid to keep them quiet...for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TBBills said:

I will tell you what. I stayed at a motel 8 last night and watched the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard case, I agree with this statement.

 

   Now in the Depp/Heard case the abuser was Amber even her video proof she recorded trying to bait Johnny into retaliating to catch on her videos only showed him slamming cabinets and basically just trying to get awa,y from her while she mocks him to tell the world he's abused because she knows it's difficult to get people to believe a man is abused.  

 

   Now could Johnny be acting and hiding an abusive  personality?  He's such a good actor that yes he could pull off such a performance I have no doubt.  However,  if he has such control over his abusive behavior than he'd be just shy of the devil incarnate himself brimming with evil that it would have manifested in one of the videos where Amber is trying to trigger such a response.   And if he were that diabolical I guarantee that Amber Heard would have been 6 feet under because as Amber herself claims he's such a powerful guy with his money and fame.

 

   I read a comment from someone where they stated they had injuries to their face that were from a young child under 2 or 3 yrs who struck his mother while he slept with her  which caused black eyes that no makeup could conceal and this was just a weak little child would be a miniscule amount of force compared to what force Depp would be capable of not to mention the heavy rings he always wears and all the marks she has are like nothing even close to what battered women suffer.  That case is an example of an attempted money grab.   It's that or Depp is the most considerate abuser in that he can strike with sufficient forcevto cause terror but very little damage to his target.  Maybe if he was Bruce Lee I'd believe he has that level of control to his hitting.  All his tendencies to run from his abuser is consistent with other abuse survivors.  It actually was probably in a twisted way a very good gift he gained from the abuse he grew up with from his mother and watching his father never responding to her abuse with any physical retaliation.   

 

   And then Amber Heard is claiming she's so afraid of this man that she's constantly running after him and even mocking him on her own videos.  So she overcomes her fear to chase after him time and again like no DV victim would do.  They are looking to get away from their abusers.  She should have had some secret video cameras

installed when she had the locks to the penthouses changed its not like she couldnt afford some very stealth sophisticated cameras to capture the abuse.  She maybe dismissed that as she knows she's the abuser and wanted to get him riled up after seeing her lame attempts to hide the phones she used to record with.  Her childhood she grew up helping her dad at his dog fighting ring which is a breeding ground for psychopathic lack of empathy.  I'd wager that Amber likely did abuse some of the dogs when she was young.  She does the opposite of what most dv victims exhibit when she's constantly and looking at him in court and when she claimed he couldn't look at her it came across to me like she was trying to flip the fact that she no longer has any power over him to almost claiming he can't look at her because she's in the right and he's guilty and can't face his guilt when he looks at her.  She tries to gain sympathy by claiming there have been threats made to her daughter and she feels his powerful influence is the cause.

I see a narcissist whom I'd be wary of her trying to frame an injury to her daughter that she actually inflicts.  Because I do see she's gonna react badly to the lack of support she is convinced she is entitled to just because she's a woman.  

 

 

  Just read that the jury found in depps favor.   Johnny's response is very well stated that the truth was what he was after not any money which he certainly does not need as he's actually invested well in real estate and now he'll likely command his top actor pay for any future roles he chooses to accept I imagine he will have tons.  I like that he's hoping a result is  getting back to innocent before guilty for all men and women alike in the justice system and the court of public opinion.  Empathy and concern for others welfare are not a mark of an abusive personality.  And I know he's a top notch actor but no one can mask a flaw nonstop under the media scrutiny he's subjected to just because he's Johnny Depp.  

 

   And Amber is still exaggerating and twisting the truth with her mountains of evidence being overlooked.   It's cause the evidence doesn't match your story.  There are real DV victims that have real injuries including being paralyzed or killed by their abusers.  News flash  quantity of evidence doesn't equate to quality of evidence.  

 If there had been quality evidence Depp would have faced criminal charges.  

Edited by AuntieEm
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gene1973 said:

 

And exactly what actual facts does the NFL personal conduct policy have to work with to levy punishment? No criminal charges, no evidence other than believe the woman scenario. 

 

I don't see how they can hand out a suspension with zero actual evidence.

 

The personal conduct policy is not held to a beyond reasonable doubt standard. Circumstancial evidence is sufficient for the Commissioner to levy a penalty as long as the independent disciplinary officer decides Watson does have a case to answer. 

 

We know the commissioner has wide but not boundless discretion - that is established by the case law in the deflategate case. He would basically have to act irrationally to be outside the scope of the policy. I suspect a lifetime ban on the basis of circumstancial evidence might test that threshold, but it wouldn't be a slam dunk even then. A 1-2 year suspension I think is clearly within the bounds of reasonableness. My guess is 1 year but no contact at all with anyone from the team, no access to the facility, a complete and total 1 year ban, possibly with a second year suspended.

 

And I share a lot of your general concern about the court of public opinion and people substituting "what I think" for what the court found which I am profoundly concerned has wider implications for western democratic justice systems as someone who has worked in that field for the majority of my career. I have articulated that view on this topic before and don't propose to re-hash it. I also promote that view on an almost daily basis within the UK Government.

 

But that is different than what the NFL Personal Conduct Policy is. That is a proper investigation and a balancing of the evidence, just one not held to the same standard as a criminal court (nor should it be). The NFL is completely within its rights to investigate Watson and the Commissioner has broad discretion over the sanction he will face.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheBrownBear said:

I've been one to sort of reserve judgment and watch this from a distance with curiosity as to how it would all play out.  But I finally watched the Real Sports segment last night and Ms. Solis came across as HIGHLY BELIEVABLE and clearly exhibiting the behaviors of someone who was suffering from serious emotional trauma.  After watching that I'm not sure how anyone could come away thinking that Deshaun Watson did not cross the line and do something seriously wrong during his interactions with Ms. Solis.  I don't remember much from Crim Law, but it would seem some of his alleged behavior waded into actual sexual assault territory.  I would not be shocked by a Trevor Bauer length suspension at this point.

 

Edit:  Also, if you value your humanity, do not click the link to the Cleveland Browns fan forum thread.  It's the most disgusting thing I've read in quite some time.  

Where's the link? I don't see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The personal conduct policy is not held to a beyond reasonable doubt standard. Circumstancial evidence is sufficient for the Commissioner to levy a penalty as long as the independent disciplinary officer decides Watson does have a case to answer. 

 

We know the commissioner has wide but not boundless discretion - that is established by the case law in the deflategate case. He would basically have to act irrationally to be outside the scope of the policy. I suspect a lifetime ban on the basis of circumstancial evidence might test that threshold, but it wouldn't be a slam dunk even then. A 1-2 year suspension I think is clearly within the bounds of reasonableness. My guess is 1 year but no contact at all with anyone from the team, no access to the facility, a complete and total 1 year ban, possibly with a second year suspended.

 

And I share a lot of your general concern about the court of public opinion and people substituting "what I think" for what the court found which I am profoundly concerned has wider implications for western democratic justice systems as someone who has worked in that field for the majority of my career. I have articulated that view on this topic before and don't propose to re-hash it. I also promote that view on an almost daily basis within the UK Government.

 

But that is different than what the NFL Personal Conduct Policy is. That is a proper investigation and a balancing of the evidence, just one not held to the same standard as a criminal court (nor should it be). The NFL is completely within its rights to investigate Watson and the Commissioner has broad discretion over the sanction he will face.

 

Wow, I just don't see more than a half season ban. And even then, I think the severity of the ban is due to the high number of accusers. How do we know this lawyer didn't take a small handfull of legitimate complaints, go out and find every massage therapist who ever worked on Watson and asked them if they wanted a shot at free money? I would not put it past a lawyer to try this in the era of meetoo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gene1973 said:

 

Wow, I just don't see more than a half season ban. And even then, I think the severity of the ban is due to the high number of accusers. How do we know this lawyer didn't take a small handfull of legitimate complaints, go out and find every massage therapist who ever worked on Watson and asked them if they wanted a shot at free money? I would not put it past a lawyer to try this in the era of meetoo.

and that'd only be worth half a season?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

The 23rd plaintiff is seeking the minimum compensation. She just wants Watson to be held accountable. What's your excuse now?

 

Also it isn't about believing all 23 women. If even 1 is telling the truth he should be punished. Did you watch Ashley Solis's interview?

I'm just saying, even if something only happened with 10 of these women, as soon as some women say something, more can follow and the women of course will always get the benefit of the doubt because the man has already been accused. So no matter what Watson says, any woman that comes out from here forward is gonna be believed and they know that. It gives them a better opportunity of being compensated even if nothing happened because of Watson's reputation already. I refuse to believe something happened with all these women and I would bet that is the case

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Warcodered said:

and that'd only be worth half a season?

They'd still only be compliants... No elevator camera of a player beating his significant other, no evidence of physical abuse, no rape kit etc, just words. Words like Amber Heards...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gene1973 said:

 

Wow, I just don't see more than a half season ban. And even then, I think the severity of the ban is due to the high number of accusers. How do we know this lawyer didn't take a small handfull of legitimate complaints, go out and find every massage therapist who ever worked on Watson and asked them if they wanted a shot at free money? I would not put it past a lawyer to try this in the era of meetoo.

 

How do we know? We don't know. The point is that the personal conduct policy doesn't mean the NFL needs to know. It just has to consider the balance of probabilities and it is more probable than not based on what is in the public domain (and obviously the NFL investigation will likely have some evidence not in the public domain) that Watson has infringed the policy. 

 

I disagree totally with your last point. It hasn't got anything to do with #metoo or any kind of presumption in favour of women. Though I would say that the fact that the lawyer for the women has made this a trial by public opinion from the start is just an example of my concern about how the justice system stands up to its objective function in a world where it is being buffeted by outside influences that never existed to this extent before. Evidence should be tested in court rooms not tv interviews.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

I refuse to believe something happened with all these women and I would bet that is the case

 

This is a straw man. No one is saying that all of the women are telling the truth unconditionally. I think it likely that at least one is using this as a cash grab opportunity just based on the numbers, although I'm in no position to judge each individual case. I am however also extremely confident that Watson is a predator and took advantage of a lot of massage therapists. If you agree that he took advantage of even one of these women then presumably you agree he should be punished by the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...