Xavien Howard Super Thread | Page 6 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Xavien Howard Super Thread

GRYPHONK said:
I didn't know we were arguing Mach.

Interesting enough, my 3rd paragraph clearly states Civil trial.

I have plenty of knowledge with the law.

Just curious, when you responded did you miss the part where I stated he didn't want this to go to Civil Trial? Again, not arguing, I am seriously asking

I never once mentioned Criminal Trial. As a matter a fact I clearly stated later, in another post, he is innocent until proven guilty and personally I believe he should play.

If you put both together I very clearly acknowledge and understand the difference.

Again, never realized we were arguing. As a matter of fact, I respect and appreciate your posts.

But in the end, I believe my post stating he should play and is innocent until proven guilty clearly shows my posts are not out of disdain but understanding how the law works.

Again, this is backed by my difference of opinion when mentioning Civil Trial. Cause, you obviously understand the difference. And, no that is not meant to be sarcastic.
Click to expand...
He doesnt have a choice of going or not, if the women do not settle.

Watson has, in fact, claimed to be amicable to a settlement, but with the stipulation that the settlements are public. I don't think thats unreasonable.

I don't think all the women want to go to trial either, for obvious reasons.

The whole thing is convoluted. Bottom line, he's a dirt bag, but that really has no bearing on the law.

I couldn't care less if he ends up broke and homeless. I have zero sympathy for someone who has a life beyond imagination, and manages to pi$$ it away. On the other hand, I agree with the basic tenant of our legal system of innocent until proven guilty, That's why I don't believe a civil suit should be cause for punishment, beyond the monetary ones. That is the basic framework of civil suits. It is a preponderance, rather than reasonable doubt.
 
DPhinz_DPhinz said:
View attachment 81641

You seem hell-bent on having Watson punished for something. Well here is the statement from his lawyer. You put two and two together...I know there are missing steps in this problem.



If you read this tweet, let's try to get you away from simple addition and move over to some algebra...find X.

"We have made it clear all along that there would be no settlement unless the terms are made public and all participants are allowed to speak in their own defense at all times."

The above statement is all you need to know about whether this case will go before a civil case...and the women darn sure don't want it to go to a criminal court.

Why?

Because the women stand a chance of being outed as sex workers who call themselves massage professionals. How apt would your jury be to rule against a man who had sex with a prostitute a number of times AND paid the prostitute each time?

The Texan's training camp began today. Watson was in attendance. I'll be glad when this is cleared up and the Tua people can go back to biting their nails off.
Click to expand...


Mach2 said:
He doesnt have a choice of going or not, if the women do not settle.

Watson has, in fact, claimed to be amicable to a settlement, but with the stipulation that the settlements are public. I don't think thats unreasonable.

I don't think all the women want to go to trial either, for obvious reasons.

The whole thing is convoluted. Bottom line, he's a dirt bag, but that really has no bearing on the law.

I couldn't care less if he ends up broke and homeless. I have zero sympathy for someone who has a life beyond imagination, and manages to pi$$ it away. On the other hand, I agree with the basic tenant of our legal system of innocent until proven guilty, That's why I don't believe a civil suit should be cause for punishment, beyond the monetary ones. That is the basic framework of civil suits. It is a preponderance, rather than reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...

I agree with this whole post.

Exactly. Preponderance vs. Reasonable doubt

Exactly why he wouldn't want this to go to Civil. That was my point about credibility to the other ladies. Not criminally, but in a civil suit.

Also, why the ladies wouldn't want this to go to Criminal Trial as well.

I whole heartedly agree innocent until proven guilty, regardless of what I personally believe.
 
Mach2 said:
He doesnt have a choice of going or not, if the women do not settle.

Watson has, in fact, claimed to be amicable to a settlement, but with the stipulation that the settlements are public. I don't think thats unreasonable.

I don't think all the women want to go to trial either, for obvious reasons.

The whole thing is convoluted. Bottom line, he's a dirt bag, but that really has no bearing on the law.

I couldn't care less if he ends up broke and homeless. I have zero sympathy for someone who has a life beyond imagination, and manages to pi$$ it away. On the other hand, I agree with the basic tenant of our legal system of innocent until proven guilty, That's why I don't believe a civil suit should be cause for punishment, beyond the monetary ones. That is the basic framework of civil suits. It is a preponderance, rather than reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...

I don't know enough to have any kind of judgement. Wanting the thing public seems to be something a wrong doer might not necessarily wanting to do.

" I couldn't care less if he ends up broke and homeless. I have zero sympathy for someone who has a life beyond imagination, and manages to pi$$ it away.

On the other hand, I agree with the basic tenant of our legal system of innocent until proven guilty, " ((Hmmm)



Looks like the innocent til proven guilty was just your words when in the beginning of the statement there seems to be your share of making That judgement you say needs to go through the legal process of proof first.. Did I miss something ?
 
Mach2 said:
Don't mistake my views of the reality for me saying it isn't a "big thing". The guy obviously has little respect for women. Now, it's also true that some women have little respect for themselves. That doesn't make it OK.

I suspect that some of these women truly felt violated, while others just rolled with it at the time and now see an opportunity to cash in.

In any case, I prefer to pass on having the "face if the franchise" be seen as a pervert with definate character issues.

Let me put it this way. Everyone would love to have a nice likeable "clean cut" stud player at QB.

SB, or not, nobody would (should) be in favor of a multiple rapist in that position.

I'm not saying DW is that, just illustrating a point.

There is a huge range between the two situations, and everyone draws their own line somewhere in between.

I don't think its as clear cut of a line that you often purport, and you admonish ppl for the sole reason that they draw their line in a different place than do you.
Click to expand...
I am convinced the line is drawed because Tua is our QB. 100%. If Cutler is still our QB, there will be no line. I have no doubt.
 
cuzinvinny said:
I don't know enough to have any kind of judgement. Wanting the thing public seems to be something a wrong doer might not necessarily wanting to do.

" I couldn't care less if he ends up broke and homeless. I have zero sympathy for someone who has a life beyond imagination, and manages to pi$$ it away.

On the other hand, I agree with the basic tenant of our legal system of innocent until proven guilty, " ((Hmmm)



Looks like the innocent til proven guilty was just your words when in the beginning of the statement there seems to be your share of making That judgement you say needs to go through the legal process of proof first.. Did I miss something ?
Click to expand...
I don't see them as mutually exclusive.

If a guy wins the lottery, and blows it all on coke and whores, I don't think he should get life in prison, but I also dont have sympathy, as he made some very poor choices.
 
Feverdream said:
Watson coming in was a smart move on his part... it forces the NFL to put him on the list without actually standing any chance of having to play. He'll lurk around in camp and bring everybody down... the Texans will probably by dying to be rid of him.

Hoard could do the same thing, but unlike Watson... he'll be forced to actually play. He'll need to show potential suitors that he is healthy and still playing at a high level.
Click to expand...

We could trade "X" for Watson, both teams put those players on one year contracts and see what happens after that - LOL
 
DPhinz_DPhinz said:
Watson's lawyer admitted that Watson had consensual sex with massage professionals. I can't find one instance of Rusty Hardon using the word "solicit". That's words that the prosecutor would use.

I stand corrected if you can provide the quotes from Rusty Hardin that says his client "solicited for more than a massage," or any quotable using the word solicit....
Click to expand...

Maybe you could take a minute and explain how the words "consensual sex" and "massage professional" work in a professional context outside of a lawyer putting them together? Trolling masseuses is pretty damning as massaging someones d**k is usually a professional of another kind.

There are lots and lots of ways for a young, rich, healthy, famous, and good looking guy to get laid and one would assume a kid in his circumstances wouldn't have to pay for it. He was clearly enjoying pushing boundaries and it's not surprising at all given the numbers involved, that he pushed right on through the boundaries into being a piece of sh*t abuser.
 
Mach2 said:
Not a fan of moral conviction I see.....lol
Click to expand...
Not NFL, not Hou, not me. Just win baby.

BTW, do you know one forth of NFL players are under lawsuits.
So you draw the line at surf and turf, but not spouse abuse??.....I myself do not know how to draw the line, therefore, as long as a player not in jail, I have no problem.
 
Dan13Forever said:
Not NFL, not Hou, not me. Just win baby.

BTW, do you know one forth of NFL players are under lawsuits.
So you draw the line at surf and turf, but not spouse abuse??.....I myself do not know how to draw the line, therefore, as long as a player not in jail, I have no problem.
Click to expand...
For real? Dang.. that's alot.

Is there a link showing who?

No wonder people call it the national felon league
 
SF Dolphin Fan said:
Other than potentially character issues, Watson is already a top five quarterback in my opinion.

So I'd completely understand if Miami traded for him. Tua is still an unknown, but I do like his upside.

The other factor in a trade is Miami might be able to get him for less than before all the controversy.
Click to expand...

I feel the same way. Really like Tua alot but if they go Watson (established) I understand. But feel bad for Tua for some reason he's gotten really the short end of the stick here.

Tua's upside also the fact at his cost and the better opportunity to keep building, were as Watson will be a bit costly next year...
 
DPhinz_DPhinz said:
He was in training camp today...1st day to report.
Click to expand...
The only report I saw was IRap around 9 this morning stating they expect him to show.
Haven't heard anything since. Seems like Houston is going to play this real quite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom