Why would you put this about the dichotomy for elections. Fwiw the last dem or pub I voted for was Dub in 2000. But it's not political to ask a woman to have sex, there's nothing to say that he forced himself
Tough watching Deshaun be a villain…
- Thread starter VaTiger85
- Start date
- Fair enough, but the other part of my sentence is true: he does admit to committing sexual acts with the accusers (while he maintains it was consensual). The point is, that Deshaun admitted he committed sexual acts.
- Lawyers don't push people to civil court? Um...yes they do lol. Lawyers will push their clients toward the most likely positive outcome for their clients. Because the criminal court has a much higher burden of proof, if a client's accusation lacks hard evidence, but has reasonable merit, then a lawyer may push their client to a civil suit. While some lawyers may be stupid, most reasonable lawyers won't rush into a court case they know they'll lose.
- I care because 1) the vast majority of Clemson fans (fans who probably would judge just about anyone else in Deshaun's position) are adamantly defending Deshaun and 2) it's hypocritical for Clemson fans to tout the university's and football program's high moral standing and still welcome back Deshaun with open arms when, at best, he's a creep and has demonstrated actions unbecoming of how a real man should act.
- I am not trying to reverse a court's decision. This is a forum for discussion. You can base your opinion on someone entirely because a court says he's innocent, but I chose to look beyond just a court ruling when forming my opinion of Deshaun or his actions.
I appreciate and agree with many of your opinions on this topic but I must tell you that you are wasting your time discussing this subject with many on this board.
Deshaun’s fall from grace has been hard to watch. He’s a legend at the bank and will always be a pivotal part of Clemson’s rise to the mountaintop but he’s in a new season of his life.
The cynic in me thinks those Instagram “massage therapists” knew what time it was and the encounters were likely consensual. But the realist in me knows that in the “believe all women” era, you get judged on allegations. I don’t think the timing was coincidental, either.
Also it’s safe to say he’s proof that you can’t miss a year and a half in the NFL and flip the switch back on. He looks slower than before and his throws just don’t have as much zip. He still shows flashes but the guy who was spectacular in Houston is gone.
The cynic in me thinks those Instagram “massage therapists” knew what time it was and the encounters were likely consensual. But the realist in me knows that in the “believe all women” era, you get judged on allegations. I don’t think the timing was coincidental, either.
Also it’s safe to say he’s proof that you can’t miss a year and a half in the NFL and flip the switch back on. He looks slower than before and his throws just don’t have as much zip. He still shows flashes but the guy who was spectacular in Houston is gone.
If you operate in the negative like that you must be miserable, I'll pray for you.
I choose to believe in logic, people will money grab when possible, and people who can fvck whenever they want, won't try to get hjs from massage therapists (not that there's anything wrong with that if it's consentual)
It's pretty obvious where your allegiances are though, I'm sure this is a troll so, shame on me for leaning into this nonsense
NEVER SAID HE WAS CHARGED OR HE WAS CONVICTED. Geez, have you read any of my posts?
I AM NOT MISTAKING CIVIL CASES WITH CRIMINAL CASES. Once again, did you read my posts? It's incredibly rare for several grand juries to decline to bring charges? No, it's not. While this was a highly publicized case, grand juries turn down hundreds and thousands of cases every month that go unnoticed. Grand juries hold criminal cases to a much higher degree of standards, so unless there's credible hard evidence, they won't indict. As I've said in my previous posts, which I guess you skipped, is that it's totally understandable why grand juries would not convict Deshaun criminally. It's a "he said, she said" situation. There are no videos, eyewitnesses, or physical evidence (like a rape kit or physical signs of abuse). That's because all of the instances of Deshaun interacting with the accusers were behind closed doors with just the two of them. Do you understand how difficult it would be to convict someone criminally when it's just one person's word versus another? You can say that criminal evidence is weak and still point out that cursory evidence and victim testimony imply guilt. This is especially often the case with sexual assault situations. Things like theft, murder, fraud, etc. always include some kind of physical evidence. If you as a man (presumably) grab and kiss a woman behind closed doors, it just comes down to your word versus hers.
It's funny that apparently, everything comes down to whether or not someone is convicted criminally to determine the truth when you and many others are just blindly assuming the attorney is a crook just looking to get a settlement. I'm not saying the accuser's lawyers aren't looking to get paid - it is their livelihood after all - but a lawyer's motivation does not dictate the viability of a client's accusations.
Once again, I understand what civil juries are and their standard for rulings. You say Deshaun could have lost a lot of money in a civil trial, but, if the standard is "more likely than not", then why didn't Deshaun fight the civil case harder? Deshaun is very wealthy, what's the cost to him to keep his lawyer on retainer, see the civil trial through, and allow the ruling to judge him guilty or not? The non-criminal evidence isn't damning, I'm sure a civil jury would have found him innocent.
If you read any of my posts at all, I'm not trying to get his non-conviction overturned. I'm trying to keep hard-headed people like you to shift your perspective away from just a singular ruling shaping your own opinion of a person. Court rulings are not always right and a lack of hard evidence does not always mean someone is innocent. I'm not saying criminal courts should change "guilty until proven innocent" or "the burden of proof is on the accuser", those are foundational. I would rather have 10 guilty men walk free than 1 innocent person be convicted. Yet, all of that doesn't mean the legal system is perfect or that an "innocent" man isn't guilty.
Grand jury's can't convict anyone of anything.
It's not against the law to ask someone to give you an hj
If you like to blindly support accused sexual assaulters, I'll pray for you too.
I also believe in logic, I'm not saying Deshaun should be in jail right now. There's not enough "courtroom" evidence to get a conviction. But, you say you're logical, and then turn around and say the accusers are just grabbing for money without any hard evidence. Doesn't sound logical to me.
Maybe I am trolling. If anything, I'm just trying to get the blind loud crowd of Deshaun worshippers to take a step back and have a different perspective.
You need to attend a sexual assault seminar. Help yourself, sir.Grand jury's can't convict anyone of anything.
It's not against the law to ask someone to give you an hj
I don’t intend to wade into this polarized conversation other than to say this:
I was on a SC grand jury for two years.
Literally 100% of the jurors voted True Bill 100% of the time except for me.
I can only speak about my experience.
It was truly just a rubber stamp outfit.
I was on a SC grand jury for two years.
Literally 100% of the jurors voted True Bill 100% of the time except for me.
I can only speak about my experience.
It was truly just a rubber stamp outfit.
Not exactly but close enough.
And really that’s my point. It was unbelievably easy to get an indictment.
Some dude earlier in this thread said that grand juries turn down thousands of cases per month.
Was not my experience at all.
You misunderstood what he said about #2. This was a money grab plain and simple. Watson was charged with no crime. Everything else is just people making up what they want to be true in their heads.
Deshaun is the man and I hope he leads the Browns to the playoffs.
What exactly did I misunderstand?
Also, do you have evidence that it was a money grab? If you're so quick to judge Deshaun's lack of conviction as evidence of his innocence, what evidence do you have that this was a "money grab plain and simple."
Also, good luck with Deshaun leading the Browns to the playoffs...
So, a "Clemson man" can be an accused sexual assaulter by 20+ women? Also, do you not think Clemson's greatest athletes should be held to a higher standard?
Some of us don’t default to believe the female/females in a he said she said accusations. Two grand juries failing to make 1 charge tells me all I need to know. You don’t pay someone to fly half way across the country for a massage. Gtfo. I’ll enjoy standing here on the ground laughing at you and that high horse you’re sitting on. What a joke.
Nope they are regular people like you and I. Key word they’re accused, I didn’t see any charges. That tells me all I need to know.
You're talking about me. And, you're right about grand juries turning down cases. I'll gladly admit when my opinion is proven wrong.
I did find this article concerning Deshaun's lack of conviction interesting though:
Why wasn’t Deshaun Watson charged? What prosecutors needed to file charges
Laurin and Kincaid each said the cases highlight the gap between what activity victims and often times the public believes qualifies – or should qualify -- as a felony sex assault, and what counts as a felony and a misdemeanor in Texas law.
Given the nature of his alleged crimes, the state-level intricacies of indictments (and their lack of public records), and the complications of "he said, she said" accusations, it's no surprise to me that a grand jury didn't indict him on federal criminal charges.
Sigh.
He didn't say that "lawyers don't push people to civil court." Go back and read it again. He said "lawyers don't push people to civil court because of a lower statute. They do it because there is potential for a settlement payout."
It's cool. I know you were in a hurry to condemn a kid that's never been charged with a crime and you misread. No biggie I was just letting you know.
There's just as much or more evidence of this being a money grab than there is of any impropriety on Deshaun's part. You're wringing your hands cause he solicited sex off instagram like you have some monopoly on morality.
Last edited:
And some of us don't disregard the weight that 20+ accusations carry or blindly support a man who threw the football really good while he was at Clemson. If it was one woman, sure. But, if 20+ women accuse you of the same thing, then there's more than something there. As I've been arguing in this whole thread, failing to get an indictment of federal criminal charges does not inherently mean there was nothing wrong going on. It means that the standards of the indictment were not met. This can mean something criminal took place, but the level of the crime or the hard evidence(s) of the crime does not meet those standards to indict on federal criminal charges. If a court ruling tells you all you need to know to form an opinion about someone, how do you feel about, say, OJ Simpson? Courts and juries get rulings wrong, whether by lack of missed judgment or missing evidence. We do not have to form our opinion of someone based on a court's rulings.
I guess I'll enjoy sitting here on my high horse shaking my head at you wondering why you're lying in the dirt for someone you owe nothing to.
*Bigger sigh*
Even if my response initially misread what he said, the point still stands. A lawyer pushing a client towards a civil case and a settlement payout doesn't mean it's a money grab or the accused is inherently innocent. As I've said repeatedly, it's a "he said, she said" case, and, in those cases, the best most women can hope for is a little compensation for their terrible experience.
Are there sleazy lawyers out there (i.e., a lot of injury lawyers) who exist just to take on hundreds of civil cases and get their cuts of small settlement payouts? Sure. Is that the case here? You have just as much the burden of proof for your claim that there is "just as much or more evidence of this being a money grab than there is of any impropriety on Deshaun's part" that the women had when they accused Deshaun. If you want to maintain a consistent position that "a court's ruling is the end-all-be-all" then you can't claim it was clearly a money grab. So, let's hear it: what evidence do you have that this was a money grab?
I don't have a monopoly on morality, just as you don't. And if I'm hand-wringing about a man who clearly did some creepy stuff, then you're hard-wringing over defending him.
Thread finally made it to where it needs to be. What a crap show but fun to read all the posts and people’s hurt feelings.
Ok
Ok judge rockhead, keep throwing those stones. One day you might get a handy too
All I know is that he needs to get his head out his ass and start playing well or he’s going to the bench on my fantasy team .
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
**New** Our inside look at Clemson's offseason portal acquisitions
- Latest: OrangeBandit