Anthony Obi Ogbo
Watson’s assault case might unravel a test of courtroom litigation competence
After a dramatic mayoral election meltdown, Attorney Tony Buzbee faces another challenge ―this time in a district court
Rusty Hardin, an attorney, is not well-known to me, as my usual interest is in politicians and leaders or perhaps, politics and leadership. However, I do recall a few of his litigation endeavors. For instance, when the former Houston Oilers quarterback, Warren Moon, was acquitted by a Fort Bend County jury of choking and beating his wife. And in 2004, when an NBA Hall of Famer, Calvin Murphy, got off scot-free from charges that he sexually abused five of his ten daughters. Also in 2008, when the wife of the televangelist, Joel Osteen, walked away from a case involving a flight attendant who accused her of assault. As well as in 2012, when former MLB pitching legend, Roger Clemens, faced federal charges of lying to Congress and obstructing justice. Hardin represented Clemens in the Washington D.C. trial where a jury acquitted him of all charges after eight weeks of testimony.
In December 2019, the Houston-based millionaire, Tony Buzbee, was humiliated at the polls, losing his bid to unseat Houston Mayor, Sylvester Turner. He played down his loss, arrogantly defying a customary concession stating, “We didn’t really lose, we just ran out of time.” Today, attorney Buzbee is facing another challenge; a courtroom battle over a high-profile case that he initiated. The problem might not be the case but rather the counsel on the other side, Rusty Hardin.
There were reports over a number of lawsuits filed against Houston Texans quarterback Deshaun Watson, accusing him of sexual or civil assault. The accusation started a media blitz. Tony Buzbee who turned out to be the attorney for the plaintiffs, shuttled between social media and local news outlets to amplify the allegations made by his clients. He packaged his information and released it at intervals to generate suspense—the type that would get the accused’s attention and lure him to the negotiation table.
Tony Buzbee who turned out to be the attorney for the plaintiffs, shuttled between social media and local news outlets to amplify the allegations made by his clients.
As of April 9, a total of 22 civil lawsuits have been filed against Watson and recorded on the Harris County District Clerk’s website accusing him of a range of actions during massage appointments over the past year; from refusing to cover his genitals to forced oral sex. But Watson blatantly denied the allegations in the lawsuits, which did not name any of the women.
Matters rather got interesting after attorney Hardin finally filed an answer on April 19, to the 22 lawsuits filed against Deshaun Watson. Hardin accused all the women suing Watson of lying. “Today we answered the lawsuits filed against our client Deshaun Watson. Therefore, the answer to the question of whether we are saying that all 22 plaintiffs are lying about the allegations of sexual misconduct by Mr. Watson is a resounding yes.”
In the weeks after this allegation, it appeared that Buzbee spent more time on internet newsfeeds than with his clients. Outrageous headlines related to these incidents dominated the news in different composition formats.
Around March 23, Tony Buzbee announced his proposed lawsuits on Instagram, bragging on social media that more sexual assault allegations would follow. Within a week or so, 16 women had already made similar allegations of misconduct in 16 separate lawsuits. At some point, the number of accusers rose to 22.
Buzbee’s media campaign paid off as Watson dominated the local news, more so than COVID-19, generating interest, negative attention, and anxiety, especially among sports fans.
Buzzbee, familiar with a clique of Houston’s local media, built his case around social media, exclusively branding each lawsuit and accusation, aiming to promote a showdown. He organized a press conference on April 6, when one of the 22 women accusing Watson publicly narrated her allegations of sexual assault. But Hardin hit back, revealing that her lawyer had asked for a $100,000 settlement before filing the lawsuit.
Those familiar with Hardin’s litigation pattern would attest to his investigative prowess; the ability to gather every available piece of information to substitute a volatile mixture of myth and innuendo with undiluted facts.
Watson did what most celebrities in his predicament would do; he maintained his composure and opted for a good lawyer who knew the difference between social media conviction and the courtroom litigation route. Attorney Hardin’s first task was to investigate the case. Those familiar with Hardin’s litigation pattern would attest to his investigative prowess; the ability to gather every available piece of information to substitute a volatile mixture of myth and innuendo with undiluted facts.
Interestingly, Buzbee had at the time paraded a bevy of nameless accusers, citing the need to shield their identity as victims. Hardin quickly accused Buzbee of using anonymous allegations to destroy Mr. Watson. He claimed in a statement, that he tried to get Buzbee to identify his clients, but he was asked to file a motion. Hardin did that and obtained a judgment. In two separate hearings on April 9, state court judges agreed with Watson’s legal team, which argued that Watson could not defend himself if his accusers, who all filed their civil lawsuits under the name Jane Doe, were allowed to remain anonymous.
Earlier this month, Watson’s accusers amended their petitions to disclose their names. A new lawsuit was added at the Harris County District Clerk’s office by a freelance makeup artist who detailed two separate incidents that occurred during massage sessions in September and November, when Watson allegedly assaulted and harassed her “by exposing himself, touching her with his penis and groping her”.
Hardin’s response to the individual petition signals what might be the beginning of an imminent contentious courtroom duel. Buzbee appears battle-ready. The former Recon Marine Officer began his legal career as an attorney at Susman Godfrey LLP in Houston, and in 2000, he founded Buzbee Law Firm. He spends more time promoting himself than his practice, and it has paid off. For instance, the New York Times Magazine described him as “One of the most successful trial lawyers in the country.” The New York Times Magazine based their endorsement for Buzbee in his role in the litigation against BP, following the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
Hardin remains a household name in the legal community. He is not new to the Harris County Court districts, joining the Houston legal confraternity in 1975 as an assistant district attorney and starting his practice after 15 years. Hardin is familiar with the streets, the intersections, and even the traffic lights within Houston’s downtown, the abode of the civil courthouses. He could close his eyes and identify the courtrooms, seating arrangement, and possibly, the presiding judges.
The jury process could equally leave a shocking outcome because there is no specified way to gauge how the panel will likely view any case.
All indications show that the major focus, in this case, may shift from the allegations to a clash between two legal luminaries. It might boil down to Buzbee’s media crusade versus Hardin’s dogged courtroom litigation aptitude. Buzbee, it appears, invests most of his time promoting his clients’ allegations to draw a favorable public opinion.
However, the unpredictability of court litigation might equally unload surprises. It is a complicated process where the standards of right and wrong are stifled by what one can prove. The jury process could equally leave a shocking outcome because there is no specified way to gauge how the panel will likely view any case. Hardin is already requesting a jury trial.
♦ Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, PhD, is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News
“Jonathan’s calculated and weaponized ambiguity breeds deception and weakens emerging political alliances.” —Dr. Anthony Obi Ogbo
Former Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan has once again found himself at the center of presidential speculation, floating silently above the country’s political waters while supporters aggressively market him as a possible candidate ahead of another critical election cycle. And once again, Jonathan is doing what he has mastered throughout his political career: saying nothing clearly while allowing political confusion to grow around him.
This pattern is not new. It is the same indecisive political behavior that defined some of the most consequential moments of his rise and fall. Jonathan became president in 2010 following the death of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua. At the time, many northern political stakeholders within the then-ruling PDP believed there was an informal understanding that Jonathan would complete Yar’Adua’s term but not seek another full term in 2011, thereby preserving the party’s zoning arrangement between North and South. Instead of taking a clear and immediate position, Jonathan spent months dribbling the nation politically. He neither fully denied nor openly confirmed his intentions until the political tension had already escalated nationwide.
By the time he eventually declared his candidacy, the damage had been done. Many northern allies who initially supported him felt betrayed, politically cornered, or deceived. The PDP fractured internally, regional distrust deepened, and Jonathan’s relationship with major northern power blocs deteriorated permanently. Though he won the 2011 election, the cracks created by that indecision followed him into 2015, contributing significantly to the coalition that eventually removed him from power.
Yet Jonathan learned little from that experience. Since losing reelection in 2015, his name has repeatedly surfaced during every major electoral cycle as a potential presidential contender. Each time, his supporters strategically floated his candidacy across media platforms and political circles. Each time, Jonathan refused to decisively shut the door. Silence became his political instrument, whereas ambiguity became his strategy.
Now the country is witnessing the same playbook again. As coalition politics intensify and opposition forces attempt to consolidate around alternative political movements, Jonathan’s name has resurfaced aggressively. Reports and speculations about his presidential ambition continue to dominate political discussions, especially within camps seeking to disrupt the growing momentum surrounding Peter Obi and emerging opposition realignments.
The troubling part is not merely that Jonathan’s supporters are campaigning. The troubling part is that Jonathan fully understands the implications of his silence. He knows that his political stature carries enough weight to destabilize fragile coalition negotiations. He knows his name alone can divide campaign structures, weaken consensus-building, and inject uncertainty into opposition calculations. Yet he refuses to publicly and definitively state where he stands.
That is not statesmanship. That is calculated political ambiguity. Jonathan’s political history is filled with similarly contradictory choices. After losing power in 2015, he received widespread praise for conceding defeat peacefully. He initially framed that decision as a sacrifice made to preserve Nigerian lives and prevent violence. Later, however, different narratives emerged suggesting international pressure, particularly from the United States under President Obama. The shifting explanations weakened what could have remained one of his strongest democratic legacies.
Then came another contradiction. Despite emerging politically from the PDP, Jonathan gradually aligned himself closely with the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, serving in diplomatic and goodwill capacities that many PDP loyalists considered politically inappropriate. This unusual closeness fueled longstanding allegations that elements within the APC establishment viewed Jonathan as a useful political instrument capable of destabilizing opposition coalitions from within. Whether those allegations are true or not, Jonathan’s conduct has consistently created room for suspicion.
His political base remains uncertain. His campaign structure is invisible.
Today, his undeclared ambition is already generating confusion among supporters, coalition organizers, and opposition strategists. His political base remains uncertain. His campaign structure is invisible. His intentions are unclear. Yet his loyalists continue mobilizing aggressively in his name while he watches silently from the shadows.
Nigeria is too politically fragile for this kind of elite gamesmanship. At critical national moments, leadership demands clarity, courage, and accountability. Jonathan cannot continue operating as a permanent “maybe” in Nigeria’s political future, thoughtlessly hovering around every election season like an unanswered question designed to manipulate negotiations and weaken emerging alliances.
At this time, Jonathan should sit in or sit out! If he wants to run, he should declare openly, defend his record, and face the democratic process directly. If he does not intend to run, he should immediately and publicly withdraw his name from the political marketplace. Anything short of that increasingly looks less like political strategy and more like calculated deception. Nigeria deserves leaders who make difficult choices openly—not politicians who weaponize silence while others gamble with national uncertainty in their name.
♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015) and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us
Nigeria’s Forgotten Sacrifice and the Tragedy of Xenophobia in South Africa
As George Santayana famously warned, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” The unfolding xenophobic tensions in South Africa reflect more than economic strain; they reveal a deeper crisis of memory and meaning. When history fades, gratitude dissolves, and fear replaces solidarity. The violence directed at fellow Africans is not merely social unrest; it is a philosophical failure to reconcile past sacrifice with present identity, reminding us that nations, like individuals, must remember to remain whole.
.
I recall that when I was in college in Nigeria, all Southern African students, present in substantial numbers, were on full federal government scholarships and received an additional income called a bursary. They lived better than many Nigerians; some even drove cars. Many adopted Nigerian names, assimilated seamlessly, and secured opportunities with ease, while Nigerian graduates faced rising unemployment. It was a quiet but powerful demonstration of solidarity, Nigeria investing in the future of a region still shackled by apartheid.
Today, that history feels almost erased.
For years now, waves of xenophobic attacks in South Africa, often targeting Nigerians, and more recently Ghanaians and other African nationals, have revealed a troubling pattern: violence fueled by economic frustration, misinformation, and historical amnesia. Shops are looted, homes burned, and lives disrupted under the recurring claim that “foreigners are taking jobs.” Yet this narrative collapses under even the most basic scrutiny of history.
Nigeria was not a bystander in South Africa’s liberation; it was a central force.
Under the military leadership of Olusegun Obasanjo, Nigeria became the first country in history to boycott the Commonwealth Games in protest against apartheid. That decision was not symbolic; it was costly, bold, and globally consequential. Obasanjo went further, advocating a continental defense posture and proposing what he termed a “Black bomb,” a radical idea reflecting the urgency of protecting African sovereignty against external aggression.
Nigeria’s commitment extended beyond rhetoric. During the Ibrahim Babangida regime, South Africa sought to exert strategic influence in Equatorial Guinea, offering infrastructure support before the discovery of oil. Nigeria recognized the geopolitical implications and decisively intervened, severing ties and offering its own support. The situation escalated to the point where Equatorial Guinea petitioned Nigeria at the United Nations for intervention. Nigeria did not retreat. This was not interference; it was protection. It was foresight. It was leadership.
Nigeria funded liberation movements, provided education, opened its economy, and bore economic sacrifices, including the nationalization of British Petroleum assets, to pressure the apartheid regime. These were not acts of charity; they were acts of conviction rooted in a vision of a free and united Africa.
And yet, decades later, Nigerians are hunted in the very land their country helped liberate.
The tragedy of xenophobia in South Africa is not merely about violence—it is about the collapse of historical consciousness. A generation disconnected from its past becomes vulnerable to manipulation, scapegoating, and misplaced anger. Economic hardship is real, but it does not justify the erasure of truth or the targeting of fellow Africans.
If history were remembered accurately, perhaps the conversation would be different. Perhaps the anger would be redirected toward structural inequalities rather than neighboring nationals. Perhaps the bonds of Pan-African solidarity would still hold.
But memory has faded, and in its absence, resentment has grown. Africa cannot afford selective memory. Nations that forget who stood with them in their darkest hours risk losing their moral compass in moments of crisis. Nigeria’s role in the liberation of South Africa is not a footnote—it is a foundation. To ignore it is to misunderstand both the past and the present.
Equally troubling is the persistent failure of successive South African governments to decisively confront and eradicate xenophobic violence. Such inaction, whether intentional or not, signals a dangerous tolerance, if not tacit endorsement, of these attacks, allowing them to recur with impunity. If brotherhood is to mean anything, it must be anchored in truth and reinforced by responsible leadership. And if Africa is to move forward, it must first remember and act.
♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015) and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us
The cost of this misalignment extends beyond politics and erodes the strength and perception of the Igbo brand itself — Dr. Anthony Ogbo
Few ethnic groups in the modern world embody resilience, adaptability, and entrepreneurial drive like the Igbo of southeastern Nigeria. Forged by history, particularly the trauma and aftermath of the Nigerian Civil War, the Igbo spirit has evolved into a global force defined by education, commerce, and labor. Across Africa, Europe, Asia, and the Americas, Igbo professionals, traders, academics, and innovators have exerted disproportionate influence. Their philosophy of self-determination, “Igbo enwe eze” (the Igbo have no king), has fostered a decentralized, merit-driven culture that rewards initiative and hard work.
In many respects, this dynamism mirrors that of the Jewish people. Like the Jews, the Igbo have leveraged education as a primary tool of advancement, often placing extraordinary value on academic achievement as a pathway to mobility. In commerce, both groups demonstrate remarkable networking capabilities, building trust-based systems that transcend geography. In labor, their willingness to start from the margins and climb through persistence is widely documented. These parallels are not superficial; they point to a shared cultural DNA rooted in survival, adaptability, and intellectual capital.
Yet this comparison begins to diverge in political cohesion and strategic alignment.
While Jewish communities globally have often demonstrated coordinated political engagement, aligning interests, influencing policy, and maintaining a unified voice, the Igbo have struggled to translate their economic and intellectual strength into sustained political power within Nigeria. This gap has had significant consequences, affecting not only their representation but also their broader cultural and national standing.
A critical example is their overwhelming support for Goodluck Jonathan in the 2011 and 2015 elections. While politically understandable at the time, this near-unanimous alignment left the Igbo politically exposed following his defeat in 2015. In the aftermath, many Igbo communities perceived a decline in federal inclusion and influence, reinforcing a sense of marginalization in Nigeria’s power structure.
This pattern appeared to repeat, albeit in a different form, with the passionate and often uncompromising support for Peter Obi in the 2023 elections. Obi’s candidacy energized millions, particularly among youth and the diaspora, and represented a shift toward issue-based politics. However, the “all-or-nothing” posture adopted by segments of his support base, both online and offline, arguably alienated potential allies across Nigeria’s diverse political landscape. What could have evolved into a broad coalition instead deepened ethnic and regional fault lines, weakening the strategic positioning of the Igbo in national politics.
Beyond electoral choices, the Igbo political challenge is also structural. The absence of a unified political leadership or central coordinating body has made it difficult to articulate and pursue long-term collective interests. Internal divisions, elite fragmentation, and the rise of competing advocacy voices, some constructive, others reactionary, have further complicated alignment. Additionally, separatist agitations, while rooted in legitimate grievances, have sometimes overshadowed pragmatic engagement with Nigeria’s political institutions, limiting opportunities for negotiation and influence.
The cost of this misalignment is not merely political; it touches the Igbo brand itself. A people known globally for enterprise and intellect risk being perceived domestically through a narrower lens of political disunity or agitation. This perception, whether fair or not, has implications for investment, partnerships, and national integration.
The way forward requires a recalibration, one that does not dilute Igbo identity but strengthens its strategic expression. First, there must be a deliberate effort to build political coalitions beyond ethnic lines. Nigeria’s complexity demands alliances; no single group can achieve national power in isolation. Second, Igbo leaders across business, academia, and civil society must converge on a shared political agenda that prioritizes inclusion, infrastructure, security, and economic development for the region within the Nigerian framework.
Third, political engagement must shift from emotional mobilization to strategic negotiation. This includes cultivating influence within major political parties, supporting diverse candidates across regions, and investing in long-term policy advocacy rather than election-cycle enthusiasm. Finally, the Igbo diaspora, arguably one of the most powerful in Africa, should be more intentionally integrated into political strategy, leveraging its global networks for both advocacy and investment.
Igbo dynamism remains undeniable. The challenge is not capacity, but coordination. If the same ingenuity that built global commercial networks can be applied to political alignment, the Igbo will not only preserve their cultural and economic stature but also secure a more decisive role in shaping Nigeria’s future.
______
♦ Publisher of the Guardian News, Professor Anthony Obi Ogbo, Ph.D., is with the School of Communication, Texas Southern University. Dr. Ogbo is on the Editorial Board of the West African Pilot News. He is also the author of the Influence of Leadership (2015) and the Maxims of Political Leadership (2019). Contact: anthony@guardiannews.us
-
Anthony Obi Ogbo2 weeks agoGowon’s Book and the Dangerous Politics of Selective Memory
-
Anthony Obi Ogbo5 days agoNigeria, South Africa: When Memory Fails, Brotherhood Burns
-
Anthony Obi Ogbo5 days agoBetween Silence and Sabotage: Jonathan’s Return to Political Manipulation
-
Anthony Obi Ogbo5 days agoIgbo Dynamism and The Politics of Misalignment
-
Column5 days agoFrom Noise to Votes: Nigerian Youth Must Turn Online Fire into Electoral Power
-
Nigeria5 days agoThe Devastation of Insurgency: Nigeria Cannot Kill Its Way Out of Insecurity