Skip navigation
Favorites
Sign up to follow your favorites on all your devices.
Sign up

Two plaintiffs in Deshaun Watson cases expand their claims, making his history of massages that turn sexual more relevant

_wmpIUo6WIYs
Mike Florio explains what a judge's decision requiring Deshaun Watson to answer questions about consensual interactions with other massage therapists means as the QB's legal issues continue.

Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson and his lawyers strenuously objected to the requirement that he disclose whether he had sexual encounters with any of the 18 massage therapists who issued statements supporting him after 22 women sued him in 2021. The lawsuits are now being revised to potentially make that inquiry more relevant to the various cases.

Via Brent Schrotenboer of USA Today, two of the plaintiffs amended their lawsuits to include claims of negligence and gross negligence against Watson. They argue that Watson was aware of his sexual proclivities during massage sessions, but that he failed to take precautions to prevent them from occurring again.

Attorney Tony Buzbee, who represents the 22 women, told Schrotenboer that more of the lawsuits will be revised in similar fashion.

“Deshaun Watson has denied he acted intentionally; we believe strongly that we will prove he did,” Buzbee said. “We have also added a claim for negligence allowing a jury to assess liability for unreasonable and imprudent conduct as well. This claim is just another through which the jury can assess liability and damages against him. We will likely add this claim for most of the cases, although perhaps not all.”

The new claims contend that Watson acted negligently by, among other things, “scheduling a massage to be alone with Plaintiff knowing of his own sexual proclivities” and “failing to take precautions prior to the massage to prevent a reoccurrence of his known prior conduct towards massage therapists.” They also accuse Watson of failing to warn the women of his past sexual proclivities during massages.

These claims make efforts to determine whether Watson had sexual relationship with other massage therapists more relevant. The argument, put simply, is that Watson had a habit of getting massages and hoping they would turn sexual. The claims arise both from his allegedly intentional conduct during the massages, and from his failure to take steps to warn or protect the massage therapists from Watson potentially trying to direct the massage toward something more than that.

Thus, if Watson has a habit of attempting to convert massages into sexual encounters, that information becomes more relevant to the claims.

Watson undoubtedly will deny any liability for negligence or gross negligence. His lawyers likely will attempt to secure a dismissal of the claims, which seem to represent an aggressive interpretation of standard negligence liability principles.