Speaker 1: Before we get started, please rate and review our show.
Speaker 1: It helps people find us. Hey, I'm John Gonzalez, host
Speaker 1: of Sports Illustrated Weekly. On this bonus episode, we are
Speaker 1: re airing an interview we did with former SI stafford
Speaker 1: Jenny frent Us, who's now at the New York Times.
Speaker 1: Jenny did extensive reporting on the allegations of sexual misconduct
Speaker 1: against Brown's quarterback to Shaun Watson while he was still
Speaker 1: with the Houston Texans. On Monday, a retired federal judge
Speaker 1: named Sue Robinson, who was appointed by the NFL and
Speaker 1: the Players Association to oversee player discipline, ruled that Watson
Speaker 1: would be suspended for six games this season as a
Speaker 1: result of more than two dozen women alleging sexual missconduct
Speaker 1: by him during separate massage therapy sessions. The ruling also
Speaker 1: stated that Watson will not be fined and that moving forward,
Speaker 1: all future massage therapy sessions for him must be with
Speaker 1: club approved therapists in club direct sessions for the remainder
Speaker 1: of his career. It should be noted, as we mentioned
Speaker 1: in the upcoming piece, that no criminal charges were ever
Speaker 1: brought against Watson, which does not mean the accusations against
Speaker 1: Watson are untrue or that he was exonerated. Watson settled
Speaker 1: with all but one of the twenty four women who
Speaker 1: filed civil suits against him. The league and players union
Speaker 1: have three business days to submit a written appeal, which
Speaker 1: could be handled by the NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. In
Speaker 1: the interim, here's my conversation with Frentis about her extensive
Speaker 1: reporting surrounding the allegations against Watson. Please be advised that
Speaker 1: we discussed some sensitive material in unvarnished detail that might
Speaker 1: be upsetting for some listeners from Sports Illustrated and I
Speaker 1: Heart Radio. This is a special bonus reairing of Sports
Speaker 1: Illustrated Weekly. We've got breaking news out of the NFL
Speaker 1: where the Texans quarterback to Shaun Watson has waived his
Speaker 1: no trade clause for the Cleveland brownsmed last week, Deshaun
Speaker 1: Watson was traded from the Houston Texans to the Cleveland Browns.
Speaker 1: According to reports, he signed a five year contract for
Speaker 1: the most guaranteed money in NFL history, where he will
Speaker 1: reportedly receive a five year, two hundred and thirty million
Speaker 1: dollar contract that makes him one of the highest paid
Speaker 1: players in the NFL. The Browns also protected Watson even
Speaker 1: if he faced his punishment by the NFL this season
Speaker 1: for his alleged behavior. Because his base salary for is
Speaker 1: just over one million dollars, any for game suspension can
Speaker 1: only be deducted from that amount, leaving at least two
Speaker 1: hundred and twenty nine million untouched. Before all that happened,
Speaker 1: a grand jury in Texas decided not to move forward
Speaker 1: with criminal charges against Watson in allegations of sexual misconduct
Speaker 1: that were made against him by multiple women. But while
Speaker 1: Watson was not charged in criminal court, there are twenty
Speaker 1: two civil suits still pending against him, as well as
Speaker 1: an ongoing NFL investigation that could potentially lead the league
Speaker 1: to take disciplinary action against the quarter back. Jenny Brentis
Speaker 1: previously covered this story for Sports Illustrated and has continued
Speaker 1: to do so for The New York Times. Be advised
Speaker 1: that what follows contains some graphic descriptions of the accusations.
Speaker 1: All right, Jenny, let's start from the beginning. Take us
Speaker 1: through the allegations against Deshaun Watson. Yeah. John, So, it
Speaker 1: was almost exactly a year ago that the first allegations
Speaker 1: surface publicly. A twenty year old licensed massage therapist named
Speaker 1: Ashley so Leice was the one who filed the first
Speaker 1: civil suit alleging that during a massage appointment, Deshaun Watson
Speaker 1: engaged in sexual misconduct order by placing his penis on
Speaker 1: her hand during the appointment without her consent. The women
Speaker 1: who have come forward have said they believed that this
Speaker 1: was a professional setting. They were going there to do
Speaker 1: a job they had been trained to do, and he
Speaker 1: took the appointment in another direction. From that first lawsuit
Speaker 1: being filed, there was then an avalanche of others that followed.
Speaker 1: There were women saying this happened to me too. I
Speaker 1: want to support the first person who came forward to
Speaker 1: say you should believe her account. There are twenty two
Speaker 1: active civil lawsuits right now. There were ten criminal complaints,
Speaker 1: and of the ten criminal complaints, eight had also filed
Speaker 1: civil complaints and two had not. So in total, there
Speaker 1: were twenty four allegations that were brought to either the
Speaker 1: civil or criminal court system, and they all were very
Speaker 1: similar accounts, from Watson exposing himself to touching the therapists,
Speaker 1: in some cases ejaculating on them, and in other cases
Speaker 1: A handful of the allegations were sexual assault. All of
Speaker 1: them had a commonality and that he booked a massage
Speaker 1: appointment with the massage therapist and then turned the appointment
Speaker 1: sexual without their consent. Take us through what happened with
Speaker 1: a grand jury that was impaneled in Texas with regard
Speaker 1: to the allegations made against the Shawn. Yeah. So, a
Speaker 1: grand jury in Harris County, Texas, which is where Houston
Speaker 1: is located, on Friday, March eleven, heard nine criminal cases
Speaker 1: against Deshaun Watson. The grand jury proceedings are secretive. They
Speaker 1: are behind closed doors. We couldn't even see anyone going
Speaker 1: in and out in these cases the grand jury. Here's
Speaker 1: testimony or evidence or whatever the prosecutor chooses to bring,
Speaker 1: and we don't know exactly how the prosecutor presented the case.
Speaker 1: We do know some elements. We know that some of
Speaker 1: the video testimony the women who filed criminal complaints had
Speaker 1: given to police, some of that was played in the hearings.
Speaker 1: We know that several of the women were subpoena to
Speaker 1: potentially provide testimony. They all sat in a room together.
Speaker 1: Only one of those women was actually called in front
Speaker 1: of the grand jury. We don't actually even know which
Speaker 1: charges they considered. We know that the police investigation was
Speaker 1: zeroing in on indecent assault, which is a misdemeanor in Texas,
Speaker 1: but three of the ten criminal complaints alleged sexual assault.
Speaker 1: But in all, the grand jury returned nine no bills
Speaker 1: after hearing testimony for about six hours, which meant that
Speaker 1: they did not believe there was enough evidence to establish
Speaker 1: probable cause for criminal charges. Jenny, there's this old saying
Speaker 1: that prosecutors can get a grand jury to indict a
Speaker 1: ham sandwich. In this case, the grand jury decided not
Speaker 1: to move forward. Why do you think they didn't indict
Speaker 1: Deshaun Watson. Yeah. I think the corollary to that axiom
Speaker 1: is that they can indict a ham sandwich if they
Speaker 1: want to indict a ham sandwich. And I'm not saying
Speaker 1: that that's the case here, certainly, But I bring that
Speaker 1: up because the prosecutor does have a lot of influence
Speaker 1: on how the case is presented to the grand jury,
Speaker 1: and I think part of the problem with the proceedings
Speaker 1: being secretive is we don't know exactly how the case
Speaker 1: was presented to the grand jury. We don't even know
Speaker 1: exactly what charges were considered. We don't know all of
Speaker 1: the information that was presented it. There were people, including
Speaker 1: prominent media members, who wrongly framed the grand jury's decision
Speaker 1: not to proceed as an exoneration of Watson, and you
Speaker 1: have written and spoken about this extensively. Explain why it
Speaker 1: is that just because no criminal charges were filed against
Speaker 1: Watson that it doesn't necessarily mean that he's innocent of
Speaker 1: the allegations made against him. The grand jury proceedings were
Speaker 1: one part of the whole process, and for Watson, it
Speaker 1: was certainly an important moment to not face criminal charges
Speaker 1: in Harris County. Many teams took that as a green
Speaker 1: light to proceed with trade conversations. That was the outcome
Speaker 1: that he was hoping for. But there are still the
Speaker 1: twenty two civil complaints. My understanding is they are all
Speaker 1: still going forward. Just because a grand jury decides that
Speaker 1: there shouldn't be an indictment here doesn't mean that there
Speaker 1: was not some form of wrongdoing. If you look at
Speaker 1: some of the facts of the case that have been
Speaker 1: put out there, and by facts I mean not just
Speaker 1: the accounts of the women, but some of the corrobor
Speaker 1: issa that we've reported on, that information does point to
Speaker 1: there being some form of wrongdoing. So you mentioned the
Speaker 1: pending civil suits against Watson. I think it's important to
Speaker 1: draw the distinction, explain how those proceedings are different than
Speaker 1: the standards necessary to prosecute in criminal court. In criminal court,
Speaker 1: to get a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard.
Speaker 1: In civil court, it's the preponderance of the evidence, So
Speaker 1: the basic legal standard is different. Tony Buzzby, who represents
Speaker 1: the twenty two plaintiffs, has said one doesn't have any
Speaker 1: bearing on the other. Just because the criminal proceedings are
Speaker 1: over in Harris County doesn't mean that the civil proceedings
Speaker 1: are over. And there certainly could be some resolution there
Speaker 1: in which a civil court would decide that the rights
Speaker 1: of the women were violated in that way. So Watson
Speaker 1: had to sit for depositions in the civil suits. Explain
Speaker 1: your reporting on this, because he invoked his Fifth Amendment
Speaker 1: right in some of those depositions, but then you've been
Speaker 1: told that he won't do so moving forward, So why
Speaker 1: while the grand jury was still considering criminal charges, Deshaun
Speaker 1: Watson pled the Fifth but once the grand jury decided
Speaker 1: not to indict him in Harris County, Rusty Harden said
Speaker 1: he would then start answering questions in the civil suits
Speaker 1: moving forward. I think civilly, if a defendant pleads the
Speaker 1: fifth that may not be helpful to their case. It
Speaker 1: may actually be hurtful to the resolution of the case
Speaker 1: if they plead the fifth. The legal strategy and civil
Speaker 1: court would be to answer questions and try to give
Speaker 1: some explanation for what's being alleged that you did. But
Speaker 1: they didn't want to do that until the grand jury
Speaker 1: made a decision in Harris County. After the grand jury
Speaker 1: decided not to proceed, the conversation around Watson, especially in
Speaker 1: traditional sports media forums, turned really rapidly to who might
Speaker 1: trade for Watson. It became a football conversation. And there's
Speaker 1: obviously a lot more going on here than just football.
Speaker 1: And I'm curious why you think sports fans and media
Speaker 1: like pivoted so quickly to the football component. Is just
Speaker 1: that sports fandom and media and social media is sort
Speaker 1: of ill equipped to have this nuanced conversation. Sexual violence
Speaker 1: overall is a topic that you need to have studied
Speaker 1: up on. You need to have spent time learning how
Speaker 1: to talk about, how to cover, how to ask people questions.
Speaker 1: I mean, I've gone to trainings to do that because
Speaker 1: it's important, right when you're interviewing people who say they've
Speaker 1: experienced sexual violence, you need to know how to ask questions,
Speaker 1: how to get information without retraumatizing. I think from an
Speaker 1: NFL perspective, because Watson is a talented quarterback, I think
Speaker 1: they were looking for something that they could point to
Speaker 1: to say this was a decision that was made that
Speaker 1: indicates we can go forward with the trade talk. So
Speaker 1: I think the grand jury making that decision days before
Speaker 1: free agency opened for NFL teams going after him, they
Speaker 1: could say, hey, listen, the grand jury decided not to
Speaker 1: indict on criminal charges. But also we hear the NFL
Speaker 1: to talk a lot about how they have a higher standard. Right.
Speaker 1: That's the whole crux of the Personal Conduct policy, right,
Speaker 1: is that it doesn't rely on there being criminal charges
Speaker 1: or civil charges to hold players accountable for behaviors that
Speaker 1: may have violated the policy. It's asking players who represent teams,
Speaker 1: who are prominent figures in their community to hold themselves
Speaker 1: to a higher standard. And so just because there aren't
Speaker 1: criminal charges brought, if you're a team, you should be
Speaker 1: seeking to understand, well, what are your responses to the
Speaker 1: behaviors alleged and the civil complaints. How do you explain
Speaker 1: your actions? Are you willing to at least express some
Speaker 1: contrition for some of the things alleged, or maybe try
Speaker 1: to rehabilitate some of the behaviors. Unfortunately, the way this
Speaker 1: has unfolded, because Watson had the no trade clause for
Speaker 1: a deal to be executed, the trade conversations became more
Speaker 1: of a bidding war, and so all the teams that
Speaker 1: were meeting with him were trying to convince him to
Speaker 1: waive the no trade clause for their team, and I
Speaker 1: think that made it a situation where it's probably a
Speaker 1: lot less likely that he was actually pushed on those questions.
Speaker 1: The reality is that the NFL's personal conduct policy is
Speaker 1: largely a public relations mechanism, and it's used to indicate
Speaker 1: that we are taking allegations against players or coaches or
Speaker 1: members of organizations seriously. But I think in this case
Speaker 1: what we've gotten is a window into the flaws of
Speaker 1: that process. There are a lot of repercussions to speaking up. Actually,
Speaker 1: so these had damage done to her massage studio. But
Speaker 1: when people speak up, they do so in the hopes
Speaker 1: that there will be accountability, and that can be difficult
Speaker 1: to achieve through the criminal system, through the civil court system,
Speaker 1: and these women are trying that they filed civil lawsuits,
Speaker 1: they filed criminal complaints, but the lead old system is
Speaker 1: not suited for survivors, and a lot of paths to
Speaker 1: getting some form of justice don't result in a clear
Speaker 1: statement of guilt or non guilt. It can also be
Speaker 1: done through the employer, and I think that's where the
Speaker 1: NFL states that it will examine and handle seriously accounts
Speaker 1: of misconduct. But the inaction to this point has served
Speaker 1: to essentially shield Watson from any repercussions whether they have
Speaker 1: legitimate reasons for not using the commissioners exemple list, while
Speaker 1: none of those have been explained, and so that's the
Speaker 1: environment that they've played a role in creating. Yeah, so
Speaker 1: much of this remains unresolved to Jenny. As you mentioned,
Speaker 1: the civil suits are pending. The League has yet to
Speaker 1: weigh in what happens next for Watson, what's he facing
Speaker 1: in terms of legal liability and also a possible league suspension. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so the twenty two lawsuits are still on going. I
Speaker 1: think that from the plaintift perspective, they have a desire
Speaker 1: to start beginning trials for some of these. Of course,
Speaker 1: the settlement could happen at any time, but my most
Speaker 1: recent conversation with Tony Buzby, he said there were no
Speaker 1: renewed settlement conversations. Unlike last year around the trade deadline,
Speaker 1: when there did seem to be a push for some
Speaker 1: of these cases to be settled, that doesn't seem to
Speaker 1: be the case now, so that is going to continue
Speaker 1: to go on. I mean, it's a little bit of
Speaker 1: a surreal circumstance where you have Watson meeting with teams,
Speaker 1: and in between those meetings with teams, he was also
Speaker 1: being deposed in those civil cases. And then in terms
Speaker 1: of the NFL, we don't know exactly the timetable for
Speaker 1: the league investigation. They have interviewed several of the women
Speaker 1: who have come forward. They planned not to interview Watson
Speaker 1: until the criminal proceedings were completed, so they have not
Speaker 1: yet interviewed Watson, and so their investigation will not be
Speaker 1: complete until they do that. It's still expected that there
Speaker 1: will be some kind of suspension by the League. Again,
Speaker 1: the personal conduct policy doesn't stipulate that there needs to
Speaker 1: be criminal charges for a player to be suspended, but
Speaker 1: teams seeking to acquire Watson, we're saying this is a
Speaker 1: long term decision, or we want him as a quarterback
Speaker 1: for many years, and so we'll withstand the suspension and
Speaker 1: then we'll have him for the long term. Jenny, it
Speaker 1: can be a little too easy, I think for football
Speaker 1: fans to get lost in the legal ease and the
Speaker 1: trade talk and the football components, and in so doing
Speaker 1: overlook the women who made these claims. Can you tell
Speaker 1: us a little bit more about what they allegedly went through.
Speaker 1: We published a story entitled a massage Therapist on her
Speaker 1: session with Deshaun Watson, and what it was was an
Speaker 1: account from a woman who we called Mary, a pseudonym,
Speaker 1: who was not one of the plaintiffs. She had not
Speaker 1: filed the civil lawsuit, she was not represented by the
Speaker 1: same lawyer representing all of the other plaintiffs, Tony Busby.
Speaker 1: We found her on her own and Mary told us
Speaker 1: an account of her session with Deshaun Watson in fall nineteen,
Speaker 1: earlier than any of the situations described in the civil lawsuits.
Speaker 1: Mary told Sports Illustrated that during her appointment with Watson,
Speaker 1: he engaged in behavior unlike any she had experienced with
Speaker 1: the client before. She said that he purposely removed the
Speaker 1: towel that was covering his private areas. She said that
Speaker 1: he told her she could touch and move his then
Speaker 1: exposed penis. She ignored that suggestion. Mary also said that
Speaker 1: Watson began thrusting his pelvis into the air after he
Speaker 1: developed an erection, and at one point she noticed what
Speaker 1: she believed to be pre ejaculate on Watson's stomach. When
Speaker 1: you actually talk to a person who has been in
Speaker 1: a massage room with Deshaun Watson, when she describes to
Speaker 1: you in detail the behavior she said she experienced, when
Speaker 1: you then have corroboration of that behavior in the form
Speaker 1: of other accounts and messages, she sent, it adds strength
Speaker 1: to what the women were saying had happened. Ashley Solise
Speaker 1: described how in real time she was questioning what she
Speaker 1: was experiencing because it didn't mesh with this public reputation.
Speaker 1: She told us that she was undermining myself and what
Speaker 1: was really happening. What was really going on. I thought,
Speaker 1: this can't be happening. He's a good person. There's no way.
Speaker 1: After the first story came out with Mary, I received
Speaker 1: some private messages that were borderline threats, essentially saying, you
Speaker 1: better know what you're doing. Why are you ruining this
Speaker 1: man's reputation? You better be right. There were some vulgar
Speaker 1: words included, and that was a little bit not surprising,
Speaker 1: but it's always shaking. Ashley Solise specifically said, I want
Speaker 1: to rehumanize us and make people remember what this is
Speaker 1: really about. When we spoke to Mary, she said, the
Speaker 1: one thing I keep thinking about is he's about to
Speaker 1: get traded to another place. He would have a whole
Speaker 1: new community of massage therapists to target. There's obviously so
Speaker 1: much swirling around to Shaun Watson, and yet, as we've
Speaker 1: discussed Jenny, multiple teams were interested in acquiring him, and
Speaker 1: I'm wondering what that says about those organizations and the
Speaker 1: risk or the trouble that they're willing to take on
Speaker 1: in order to acquire a quarterback of his caliber. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and I think this comes up a lot when we
Speaker 1: see teams deal with players who have been alleged to
Speaker 1: have committed some form of misconduct. They often talk a
Speaker 1: lot about vetting or doing their due diligence, but oftentimes
Speaker 1: it's a lot thinner than the team presents it to be.
Speaker 1: They actually haven't done the work to figure out what
Speaker 1: is truly going on here. And so in the case
Speaker 1: of Watson, and when I with Tony Buzby the other night,
Speaker 1: you know, he said none of the teams that were
Speaker 1: in the process of meeting with Watson had reached out
Speaker 1: to Buzzby had asked to talk to the women involved.
Speaker 1: And you know, maybe the women wouldn't want to talk
Speaker 1: to the teams, and that would be totally understandable, but
Speaker 1: that's a call you should make. I also think those
Speaker 1: teams should be calling the Houston Police Department speak to
Speaker 1: the investigators who spent nearly a year on the case.
Speaker 1: The other important question is the idea of second chances,
Speaker 1: and we hear that a lot in the NFL, and
Speaker 1: I think we all believe in second chances. But are
Speaker 1: the second chances actually earned and what has been taken
Speaker 1: on by the person being given the second chance to
Speaker 1: show that maybe they've grown or they are taking the
Speaker 1: behaviors that have been alleged head on and working on
Speaker 1: things like has there been rehabilitation done? And I think
Speaker 1: we so readily accept oh, yes, everyone should get a
Speaker 1: second chance without actually asking what work has been done
Speaker 1: to earn that second chance. You have done really excellent
Speaker 1: and important reporting on this, Jenny. Thank you for this,
Speaker 1: Thanks for the time, thanks for listening, and a reminder
Speaker 1: to please rate and review us wherever you listen. It
Speaker 1: helps people find us. Sports Illustrated Weekly is a production
Speaker 1: of Sports Illustrated and I Heart Radio. For more podcasts
Speaker 1: from my Heart Radio, visit the I Heart Radio app,
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your favorite shows. And
Speaker 1: for more of Sports Illustrated It's best stories and podcasts,
Speaker 1: visit SI dot com. This episode of Sports Illustrated Weekly
Speaker 1: was produced by Jordan Rizzieri, Jessica Yourmoski, and Isaac Lee,
Speaker 1: who was also our sound engineer. Our senior producers are
Speaker 1: Dan Bloom and Harry sword Out. Our executive producers are
Speaker 1: Scott Brody and me John Gonzalez. Our theme song is
Speaker 1: by Nolan Schneider. Please be on the lookout for new
Speaker 1: episodes of Sports Illustrated Weekly hitting your feed this week.
Speaker 1: Wherever you get your favorite podcasts, Yeah,