This is why, if I'm Goodell, I wait as long as humanly possible before dropping the hammer. This is a fluid situation. The last thing you want to have to do is re-visit this and re-litigate a punishment.
That detective is a bit extreme. Don’t agree with her thoughts at all. Now, she has more access to the details so maybe that’s why but I don’t see how shes helping the women's’ cases with her opinions.
She's just pointing out that the grand jury was a sham.....that there was enough evidence to proceed to trial, but the prosecutor didn't want the case to go forward so they hid evidence and testimony from the grand jury in order to have them throw it out......something I think most people who know how these things work already knew.
The way I read it, she was basically saying believe all women no matter the situation. And that men/bosses/powerful/rich can never have consent. But, it was nitpicked talking points
I think certainly don't believe ALL women....but in a situation where there is a clear pattern of sexual misbehavior targeting the exact same people by the exact same person....and all of those ties are well established, you'd have to be a real POS fanboi to think that literally dozens of women are ALL lying. Sadly, we've seen some of that here.
Right, I’m not even talking about the case. I’m talking about how extreme she was being in those hypotheticals. The whole reason I believe the plaintiffs is the sheer number and pattern. If it was just a he said, she said one to one ratio, you need all the facts.
Is this the detective that earlier complained she wasn't allowed to testify for the grand jury? If so, these answers probably explain why.
I agree that the detective Baker comes off sounding like she has an axe to grind with her responses to some of Hardin's hypothetical questions. But I'm not sure how that will play a huge role in the civil trial because the majority of what they bring against Watson should be the testimony of the victims themselves, text messages before and after and any character witnesses. An argument could be made that she didn't conduct a thorough and fair investigation if she went in to it attempting to prove Watson guilty instead of just finding the truth, but does her investigation really matter all that much in the civil cases?
Watson is so dumb. Settle and get it over with. The more it stays in the news, the more likely you have more suits. You are not getting your reputation back, only time will give u that chance. Those endorsements are gone. An older version of Watson may get some back with time and on field success. However, there is no way he is winning lawsuits against ALL 26 plaintiffs at this point.
The players association already gets taken to the cleaners with every CBA negotiation… now they’re really going to try and stand up to three of the most powerful/influential owners in the NFL? Good luck. Watson’s power play was not the start of NFL player empowerment… it just furthered the animosity/tension/gap between owners and the players who are paid by owners.
I wonder if the NFLPA fight on this is going to just be a token one. I've got to imagine they aren't too fond of defending a player with the kind of allegations that are against Deshaun. But they can't just let it go so they'll have to fight some.
They had an interview with Caserio for nearly 40 min and didn't ask him one question about the Buzbee allegation of Texans enabling Watson to harass masseuses.
