|
Replies: 15
| visibility 1
|
All-TigerNet [10616]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9249
Joined: 12/29/06
|
Walt & Qualk on Watson .....
Mar 14, 2022, 4:01 PM
|
|
Is it me or is Walt and Qualk missing something on the Watson Grand Jury. Both of them keep saying there was not enough evidence to warrant an indictment. I admit that I did not read all of the stories about the Grand Jury ruling, but isn't it possible that they had plenty of evidence, but none of the charges rose to the level of criminal conduct? In that case, maybe it should have never gone to a Grand Jury. I guess either could be true, but I am think more that the charges were not sufficient for an indictment.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [40100]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18284
Joined: 10/28/15
|
Re: Walt & Qualk on Watson .....
Mar 14, 2022, 4:05 PM
|
|
"After a Harris County grand jury was presented all the evidence and had the opportunity to hear from all witnesses, grand jurors declined to indict Deshaun Watson. Grand jury proceedings are secret by law, so no information related to their inquiry may be disclosed,” said Dane Schiller, spokesman for the Harris County District Attorney’s Office"
May never know . . .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Walt & Qualk on Watson .....
Mar 14, 2022, 4:05 PM
|
|
I think you are arguing the same point for both sides of your argument, they mean the same thing, there “not being enough evidence” means “the evidence they have isn’t sufficient” for criminal charges. Maybe I’m not understanding what you are asking, but seems to be the same thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40100]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18284
Joined: 10/28/15
|
dont want to speak for him, but I may be speaking for him
Mar 14, 2022, 4:09 PM
|
|
I think he's saying either there isn't enough evidence to try him for a specific crime meaning let's say for discussion he did it, but they don't have enough information to be worth time/money to try it. Vs. saying they have plenty of evidence, but it proved there is no crime. That's what I thought he meant, but . . .
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [53716]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43532
Joined: 11/17/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1678]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 1088
Joined: 10/10/08
|
Re: That makes two of us...***
Mar 14, 2022, 6:06 PM
|
|
Growing up in a law enforcement family, I always heard a Grand Jury would indict a Ham Sandwich!! When a Grand Jury doesn't indict, you can most assuredly figure, HE IS NOT GUILTY!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
1st Rounder [612]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 582
Joined: 6/17/21
|
Re: That makes two of us...***
Mar 14, 2022, 6:32 PM
|
|
That was put the best that I have ever heard it!
You take all the Shyte that has been collected- and throw it at the fan and if any thing sticks to the fan while spinning- you send it to trail.
Sounds like nothing stuck!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4365]
TigerPulse: 80%
Posts: 8370
Joined: 1/4/17
|
Re: That makes two of us...***
Mar 15, 2022, 12:21 PM
[ in reply to Re: That makes two of us...*** ] |
|
BBB
not guilty of a criminal offense
not the same as innocent of sexual misconduct
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38506]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5823
Joined: 12/8/20
|
ham sandwich
Mar 15, 2022, 12:36 PM
[ in reply to Re: That makes two of us...*** ] |
|
That is true.
It is not a trial. Evidence is presented and they decide if it is enough for a trial. No proof is required. There is no rebuttal. There is no defense attorney. They are folks with no training. They mostly go lock step with the presenter. They seldom even ask a question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [682]
TigerPulse: 87%
Posts: 1003
Joined: 9/8/14
|
Re: Walt & Qualk on Watson .....
Mar 14, 2022, 4:10 PM
|
|
Two ways of saying the same thing. The evidence presented didn’t warrant criminal charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [682]
TigerPulse: 87%
Posts: 1003
Joined: 9/8/14
|
Re: Walt & Qualk on Watson .....
Mar 14, 2022, 4:11 PM
|
|
Two ways of saying the same thing. The evidence presented didn’t warrant criminal charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [682]
TigerPulse: 87%
Posts: 1003
Joined: 9/8/14
|
Re: Walt & Qualk on Watson .....
Mar 14, 2022, 4:17 PM
|
|
It also begs me to say that my or you’ve opinion mean nothing. Criminal charges won’t be brought. What these money seekers agreed to do wasn’t criminal. They are now doing similar things to someone with less dollars
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10616]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9249
Joined: 12/29/06
|
Re: Walt & Qualk on Watson .....
Mar 14, 2022, 6:21 PM
|
|
Maybe I can phrase it a different way, as I am not sure we are all saying the same thing. Scenario #1 Let's say there is plenty of evidence to prove that he did "A", but according to the law "A" does not reach the level of a criminal offense ..... or "A" is a misdemeanor which by law does not require a Grand Jury. In that case "A" should have never been brought before a Grand Jury.
Scenario #2 he is being charged with "B" which is a felony, but there is not sufficient evidence to warrant an indictment. We don't know from Lovingit's post if the Grand Jury said "there is not enough evidence to prove a felony" or "there plenty of evidence to prove a misdemeanor, but that does not meet the criteria of a GJ indictment". All it says is they heard all of the evidence.
I guess it doesn't matter. He is not being indicted.
Quote from Lovingit's post: "After a Harris County grand jury was presented all the evidence and had the opportunity to hear from all witnesses, grand jurors declined to indict Deshaun Watson. Grand jury proceedings are secret by law, so no information related to their inquiry may be disclosed,” said Dane Schiller, spokesman for the Harris County District Attorney’s Office"
Message was edited by: TigerLinks®
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1778]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 2089
Joined: 12/28/15
|
Re: Walt & Qualk on Watson .....
Mar 14, 2022, 6:21 PM
|
|
I don't understand the logic of him possibly facing a suspension. There was no criminal misconduct. He sat out a year for the investigation to take place. I don't see any basis for him missing any additional games.
If they want to do something, suspend him for a game or two retroactive to last season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3276]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6503
Joined: 1/13/04
|
Re: Walt & Qualk on Watson .....
Mar 15, 2022, 1:27 PM
|
|
He sure as heck better not get more than 1 game suspended since Ray Rice only got 2 games knocking his fiance out cold. Watson was involved in some less than savory things, but apparently since the grand jury did not indict him, it was determined that those less than savory things were between consenting adults. Kinda what I thought all along.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10805]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7924
Joined: 10/18/16
|
Re: Walt & Qualk on Watson .....
Mar 15, 2022, 6:14 PM
|
|
Like any grand jury, if additional criminal evidence is found, the case can go back to the grand jury. Hopefully , nothing comes out during the depositions. Now that this has gotten this far, no matter whether there are settelments or dropped suits, the sooner this gets behind DW, the better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 15
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
