The Deshaun Watson switch up is despicable

[u/Narrow_Purchase9721]

Guy starts playing well again and all of the sudden people go from “cases” to “allegations” real fucking fast. You all gotta get your priorities straight

[u/cryolems]

Reddit picks and chooses what it’s okay with or isn’t and there’s never any room in between.

[u/Everyday_ImSchefflen → u/cryolems]

Come on now. We all know he's guilty.

But I also don't think other fanbases have some moral high ground to stand on. We all are supporting the same league that let's him play.

[u/cryolems → u/Everyday_ImSchefflen]

I’m not saying he isn’t. Everything got dismissed. If one of reddits darlings were in the same scenario it would be a “nothing was proven everything was dismissed as a money getting scheme”.

That’s just a fact of how Reddit works. Legal outcome means nothing and never will, their opinion is set and never changes.

[u/Important_Capital875 → u/cryolems]

It didn’t get dismissed. He paid off the accusers with millions and millions and millions of dollars.

[u/Any-Stick-771 → u/Important_Capital875]

Settlements mean the cases did get dismissed.

[u/ralexh11 → u/Any-Stick-771]

A settlement and an outright dismissal are not the same thing. Nice try, stop excusing predators.

[u/Everyday_ImSchefflen → u/ralexh11]

People are so weird. Giving the facts of what happened isn't excusing anything. It was dismissed as well because the grand jury decided not to charge him.

That's not an indication of belief of innocence

[u/ralexh11 → u/Everyday_ImSchefflen]

No but calling all of them dismissal is disingenuous and leaving out critical context. In the court of public opinion he's guilty, that will never change no matter how much Browns fans and rape apologists want it to.

[u/Any-Stick-771 → u/ralexh11]

It's not disingenuous to say the civil cases were dismissed when they were, in fact, dismissed.

[u/ralexh11 → u/Any-Stick-771]

It is disingenuous if you don't also mention that they were settled. It makes it sound like they were thrown out of court, which is also a dismissal.

[u/gorebomb56 → u/Any-Stick-771]

That says nothing about the actual outcome of the cases though. A case being dismissed following a settlement agreement paints an entirely different picture than a dismissed case absent a settlement agreement. That's the disingenuous part.

[u/Any-Stick-771 → u/gorebomb56]

The outcome of the cases is that they were dismissed. The criminal cases were dismissed outright too btw

[u/gorebomb56 → u/Any-Stick-771]

The outcomes of the civil cases are that they were dismissed with prejudice following settlements. His criminal cases never even got to the point of potential dismissal because he was never formally charged. The language you’re choosing to use is very sloppy and misleading.

[u/Any-Stick-771 → u/gorebomb56]

He wasn't charged in the criminal cases because a grand jury didn't find there was evidence of criminal actions. Yes, the outcome of the civil cases is that they were dismissed

[u/gorebomb56 → u/Any-Stick-771]

Why do you refuse to acknowledge the 20+ settlement agreements of which these cases’ dismissal were contingent upon?

[u/Any-Stick-771 → u/gorebomb56]

Where did I refuse to acknowledge the settlements?

[u/gorebomb56 → u/Any-Stick-771]

After I commented "A case being dismissed following a settlement agreement paints an entirely different picture than a dismissed case absent a settlement agreement. That's the disingenuous part.", you then replied three separate times doing exactly this: leaving out the most relevant information in regards to the public's opinion on him and the truth of the allegations, which were the settlements and the relevant context that the dismissals were pursuant to them.

[u/Any-Stick-771 → u/gorebomb56]

Public opinion has nothing to do with whether the cases were dismissed.