With questions still swirling around the NFL’s investigation into Deshaun Watson, another important point in the process has been reached. The league has concluded its interviews with the Browns quarterback, as detailed by Brent Schrotenboer of USA Today. 
[RELATED: New Lawsuit Filed Against Watson]
According to Watson’s attorney, Rusty Hardin, the NFL has conducted a “hell of a detailed investigation” in the wake of 23 lawsuits filed against him alleging sexual misconduct. Hardin added that the league – which met with the 26-year-old on two separate occasions – interviewed him for “a total of four days”.
This latest update comes not long after commissioner Roger Goodell said the league was nearing the conclusion of its investigation, which is unrelated to the ongoing civil litigation Watson is facing. With the interview process complete, attention will now turn to the disciplinary decision the league will make, which could include a fine, suspension, and additional punishment in the future pending the result of the civil trials.
“I don’t want to extoll on how detailed their investigation has been in case when they make their mind up that we seriously object – which I think there may be a very good possibility of that – but we just don’t know” Hardin said. He and his team, along with Watson himself, have maintained that the Pro Bowler has done nothing illegal, which is the conclusion two grand juries have come to with respect to criminal charges.
The civil cases are still bound for trial at this point, though it has long been known that none of them will go to court during the upcoming NFL season. By the time that process begins, the league will have handed down its discipline, but, in the absence of settlement agreements being reached, it will remain a major talking point for the Browns’ franchise signal-caller.
There was no way to prove a criminal case since there’s no physical evidence, from what I’ve seen. Civil is much more likely to get a favorable judgement, or more likely settlement since the burden of proof is less.
The burden of proof shouldn’t be less though.
It’s also weird that two grand juries opinion is not enough evidence, but yet the public seems to be convinced he’s guilty.
A grand jury declining to indict means…
A) They didn’t think there was enough evidence to convict him in a criminal trial and didn’t want to spend tens of millions of dollars on a “he said, she said” case?
B) That he’s been proven innocent and cleared of all wrongdoing?
Yet,you seem to want to convict him. What evidence do you have that the Grand Juries didn’t? Has any of the Geand Juries investigators come out and said they think he’s guilty of a crime but they don’t have enough evidence? If someone close to the investigation said this, then I would take it as more than a money grab by all involved
Really? Scumbag lawyers aside, if you watched the interviews of a couple of the women on HBO last week, it would give you pause for thought. His complete denial of everything is ridiculous. He was in those rooms and he pulled some sh$t. Not rape, but lowlife behavior none the less. Now what level of punishment he should receive from the NFL is debatable, but if he gets off scot free, it’ll be a heck of a bad look for the league and the Browns.
Hardin added that the league – which met with the 26-year-old on two separate occasions – interviewed him for “a total of four days”.
So, either the NFL grilled Watson for days at a time like a Gitmo prisoner…or Hardin’s law school did not have a math prerequisite.
Or, it means that they met with him for three days one week and then for another day two weeks later, which was the case. I guess your law degree from Mo’s law school and laundromat didn’t include critical thinking skills.
Just because the grand jury refused to indict doesn’t mean he is innocent of the claims made by the females involved. It does mean that the prosecution didn’t present compelling evidence of laws being broken, which is different than violating someone’s ethics and moral values, which is what the civil cases are about.
oc·ca·sion
/əˈkāZHən/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
a particular time or instance of an event.
“on one occasion I stayed up until two in the morning”
I’m with frozeninohio on this one
You join him (and Rusty Hardin) in also not understanding that occasion is singular?
K.
So teams have 2 OTA but they practice like 3 times during each session. Is that 6 or 2? You are in the 8th grade one time or is that 175 times because you go that many days?
It’s 2 OTA’s and 6 practices. And you go (using your number) 175 times to the 8th grade.
Assuming you pass and advance to 9th grade, of course.
None of that changes the fact that occasion is singular, though.
Is a vacation an occasion? Or is it multiple occasions since it’s multiple days? I once went on multiple cruises in 7 days.
Occasion being singular doesn’t prevent other things, such as cruises or vacations, from being able to be longer than a single instance.
You’re outnumbered and ridiculous
“Brownsbacker9 • 10 mins ago
You’re outnumbered and ridiculous”
Oh? So, 3 people who are wrong “outnumber” one person pointing to evidence and, what, are now right…?
You think that’s how it works?
PS- You know who else is “outnumbered”?
Deshaun Watson.
23 (or more) women have accused him of rape.
23 to 1.
He’s “outnumbered” so I guess that ends it, right?
Was he charged? Nope
No, he was “outnumbered”, though…and that…according to you…means…something. Who knows what, but…
24 to 1, now.
Watson is innocent. He said he didn’t do anything wrong and you gotta believe him
“You gotta believe him”?
No.
But, I’ll enjoy you explaining why we “gotta believe him”…
Why do we “gotta believe him”?
Because he’s a Browns quarterback. That’s why
Thanks for being honest.
Just like Bengal fans root for Mixon and Carman and Steeler fans rooted for Rothiesburger and Ravens fans loved Ray Lewis. All of these players have been accused of heinous acts yet stadiums are filled with people wearing their jerseys
noun
a particular time, especially as marked by certain circumstances or occurrences.
May not be the Oxford definition, but simply the dictionary.com version, but an occasion can reference a period in time when multiple occurrences take place. Hence the reason why your definition uses the qualifier “on one occasion” to set the understanding of one occurrence.
Today’s grammar lesson is courtesy of Mo’s Laundry and Law School whose motto is, “Where we clean up your record and your tighty -whiteys all on one occasion.”
The use of “one” in the example was used to emphasize one occasion from a different occasion and in no way referenced the duration of an occasion.
1.
a particular time or instance of an event.
in·stance
/ˈinstəns/
Learn to pronounce
noun
an example or single occurrence of something.
Just because you now blindly defend an accused serial rapist because your perennially terrible football team trades for him, you don’t actually have to defend his two bit lawyer, too, you know?
Right but someone ethics or morals shouldn’t be on trial or part of a civil suit. If ethics and morals were the basis for league action and suspensions then we wouldn’t have sports. Might as well just follow and watch politics at that point.
Well, it is about time
So, now what?
He had a happy ending..::let’s move on!!
Well Goodell has NO interest in really punishing Watson so I don’t see a very long suspension if he’s even suspended. The Grand Juries only hear the evidence the prosecutor want to present so just because they didn’t vote to indict doesn’t mean they didn’t think a crime was committed it just means they didn’t think the evidence presented a case. Grand Juries work differnt then petit juries. As a Browns fan I’m not happy about Watson being on my team and once again the Haslams have demonstrated they no nothing about building a repsectable team . Baker Mayfield is my guy…
I’m a Baker Mayfield fan too but he’s not a top quarterback. You need a top quarterback to win. I know he was injured but I just never had faith that he would get the game winning drive. Watson is much better
I’m sure Watson isn’t the only sexual deviant playing in the NFL.
Just the only one that refused to play for his team and used zero leverage to get the dumb@$$ed Browns to give up a ton to get him and reward him with a ridiculous contract that really altered the landscape.
How did it alter the landscape?
The over under for games suspended is at 6.5. I’ll take the under and guess 6games that will turn to 4 after appeal.
I still say that if Roger has been hell bent on the NFL message of minorities, females, equality, harassment on and on….how will Watson be able to return? If allowed to return then the campaign on injustices they broadcast weekly was window dressing!
How about Kraft participating in sex trafficking?
“sex trafficking”? exaggerate much? he had a massage with happy ending, pretty far from “sex trafficking”.
Lots of people don’t seem to be aware that Goodell no longer determines whether a player is suspended or not. He can “adjust” the length of a suspension – but has no input on the initial suspension decision.
It will be interesting if the league does suspend him how they spin it. What will they say about their investigation? My guess is that they couldn’t determine his guilt but the whole mess is detrimental to the league and give him 4-6 games. Then hope he settles the cases and it all goes away.