Frank Clark's Police Report (For Off Field Discussion)

[Blitzer88]

The real issue here is that JS and the Seahawks' credibility is in question. As some mentioned the night Clark was drafted, JS probably should have framed why they selected Clark in a different narrative. By saying Clark never hit her, this story will have to go through numerous cycles besides the normal fans exchanges.

You can see from the Times story that the national guys are waking from their slumber. The team had a few months to work on how they would handle the story if they selected Clark. The one they chose is similar to the in-your-face calling out of the Vikings on how they handled Jackson.

I hope this pick doesn't lead to the end of John's time here. Depends on how much in his corner Paul will be. The team and Clark will just have to try to weather the storm, not sure what they can do to turn down the heat other than to admit they did a half-ass investigation or encourage Clark to reveal the details John doesn't want to provide.

Something was shared that made the team and owner think they could justify the selection in the current climate. Would be good if they could share to shut down the evangelists.

This is what concerns me as well, could the firestorm from this pick eventually cost JS his job with the Hawks or speed up his desire to go elsewhere?

 

[Pandion Haliaetus]

Overblown.

Being from a military family and divorced parents and having moved around my whole childhood, I've seen people get jumped for being the wrong color of skin in a certain area.

I've seen a gay guy get jumped by two girls at a club, and when he pushed one of them down, and broke her wrist, he got arrested.

Everday you read about police brutality. You get attacked by over aggressive police, and you try to naturally defend yourself, police then have the right to apparently kill you.

The fight between Clark and his girl is mutually exclusive, she acted out in anger and started throwing things, if anyone knows once an angry girl starts throwing things, more things will come, and legitimately if there were 3 and 5 year olds in the room, and she throwing things, my first natural reaction would to restrain her so she doesn't hurt me or any of the kids.

And I'm sure that was part of Clark's natural reaction in reason of trying to restrain her. Throwing things at him probably won't hurt as much but if one of the little kids got hit that could be much worse.

And as a married man I won't ever lay a finger on my wife intentionally. We've got into pretty heated arguments and She's hit me plenty of times when she gets mad enough usually in the arm, chest, or back. And on a separate occasion I've have restrained her with force when she started throwing anything she could grab at me. Its just the nature of protection. Am I committing domestic violence protecting myself from flying things?

But personally I do have limits when it comes to protecting myself from women, I won't fight back unless three situations occur: I'm am threatened with a fatal weapon and then struck at with said weapon, I am violently attacked in the manhood, or I am violently attacked in the face.

I feel I will protect myself in a reciprocal act of aggression in those instances from anyone, male or female. Doesn't matter. Once you intend to violently harm me, all boundaries are gone.

Fortunately, I never had to experience those instances with a female.

But if a girl bit me in my nose (violent act to my face) I've probably would have reacted violently especially if I was drunk. And you can't necessarily reason or logic. Clark was drunk.

In the end, I don't think he punched her, if he did she would have been knocked out cold in the least or suffered severe fractures to her cheek bone in the worst.

I think she bit his nose violently and in drunken reaction he either pushed or smacked (backhand) her into the lamp.

None of her injuries seem to have real malice attempt to injury behind them. If he wanted to he could have destroyed her. Her injuries occurred in a chain of drunken self-defense reaction on Clark's side. He never struck first and even realized that he may stepped over the line just a little bit when he then gathered his things and she thew an alarm clock at him and he didn't reciopricate any further aggression.

I don't feel Frank Clark is the monster many are describing him as. I feel he reacted as many of us would have if we were young, drunken, athletes.

Again, if he was truly trying to hurt her, she would be much worse. He was protecting himself and probably the little kids by restraining her, it escalated and got out of hand.

I'm not going to condemn Frank Clark for one mistake when both parties involved are equally guilty from hurting each other. Especially when the females action of abuse were intent to injure. And the males injuries to the female party seem like they were more naturally done in self-defense reaction rather than intent to injure.

 

[dontbelikethat]

This is what concerns me as well, could the firestorm from this pick eventually cost JS his job with the Hawks or speed up his desire to go elsewhere?

Lol no way. Being 3-2 and Percy "destroying" the locker room and the team being all over the media was worse than this or or at least just as bad. It's just the heat of the moment, it will almost certainly pass.

Ray Rice situation had way worse publicity than this and their organization was crapped on pretty hard and they came out fine.

 

[Missing_Clink]

JS really comes out of this whole thing looking like a horse's ass

 

[McGruff]

I think what is irritating/frustrating/distracting to me is that Frank is a really good football player. He fits our scheme perfectly. He meets a desperate need for us.

And yet the non-football thread has 65 posts and the football thread has 14.

I hate that this is an issue and a distraction from our team. And yet, I don't know who to be irritated with. Frank for being reckless (at the least) or worthless (at the worst) in his actions. The team for taking on the PR nightmare. The press for playing up the negative. The fans for lapping it all up.

But mostly I feel bad for 7 other players who we should be talking about but aren't.

 

[kearly]

I personally feel that JS mismanaged his explanation to the media. He should have taken as much time as neccessary to explain to them why he thought it was the right thing to do, instead of giving vague answers and copping out to the media's witch hunt philosophy by saying Clark never hit her instead of doing the more proper thing and playing the 2nd chances angle. JS is only setting himself up to be an easy target of scrutiny.

But I don't think it will matter much. This will likely be a forgotten topic by October, unless Clark has another incident, of course.

 

[Rocket]

JS really comes out of this whole thing looking like a horse's ass

Not quite yet... but close. Depends on what comes next.
I'm torn between his public explanation versus him just laying low. Depends on the background of what JS saw/heard. I believe that Allen was in on this decision based on what I've read. It'd be the ultimate lame move to throw Schneider under the bus when it probably wasn't his call alone.

 

[hawknation2015]

I personally feel that JS mismanaged his explanation to the media. He should have taken as much time as neccessary to explain to them why he thought it was the right thing to do, instead of giving vague answers and copping out to the media's witch hunt philosophy by saying Clark never hit her instead of doing the more proper thing and playing the 2nd chances angle. JS is only setting himself up to be an easy target of scrutiny.

But I don't think it will matter much. This will likely be a forgotten topic by October, unless Clark has another incident, of course.

I hope so. Reports are coming out that the team didn't interview any witnesses about the incident, which makes it sound like we took his word for it and ignored the police report/photos.

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/05/seattl ... estigation


http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seah ... raft-pick/

 

[JSeahawks]

I'm hiring him to sack the qb, not to babysit my kids or hang out with my woman. As long as he stays out of jail and doesn't get himself suspended, simply do not care.

 

[Scottemojo]

I for one laud his restraint.

Let me get this right.

The guy who was drinking got attacked by the sober person. He tried to restrain her, got bit for his efforts, and he is the one being excoriated for a lack of self control?

The police arrested the wrong person, pure and simple.

 

[MysterMatt]

Don't slap a laptop?
I don't get it.

Don't break into someone's room and steal a laptop. The negative attention he is getting is deserved. I'm not going to defend him just because he's a Seahawk. He acted like an idiot. Period.

I don't think anyone is refuting that. He has, in fact, acted like an idiot. He's also 22 years old, put those incidents behind him (or is trying to), and deserves a little grace.

Of course, the media doesn't believe in grace or redemption, but Pete and John do.

 

[Blitzer88]

I think this would be a much smaller incident had JS not said "he did not hit her." Like Kearly said, if he had just focused on the second chance idea things wouldn't be blowing up right now. Everything that has come out today has made the Hawks organization look bad.

 

[Scottemojo]

The saddest part is that I'm not sure Diamond corroborating what JS said would actually make a difference now.

The pitchforks are swinging and the torches are lit.

 

[Missing_Clink]

JS really comes out of this whole thing looking like a horse's ass

Not quite yet... but close. Depends on what comes next.
I'm torn between his public explanation versus him just laying low. Depends on the background of what JS saw/heard. I believe that Allen was in on this decision based on what I've read. It'd be the ultimate lame move to throw Schneider under the bus when it probably wasn't his call alone.

He just handled the initial press conference so poorly. When he was confronted with what he had previously said about the team's DV policy, he either lied about what he knows happened with Clark or displayed some seriously pathetic beneficial ignorance. The way he then described the half-assed investigation the team did also really did not help. We all know some DV went down in that room. A large man hurt a woman much smaller than he.

What JS should have done rather than his embarrassing and tone-deaf response is acknowledge that the team is no longer holding firm on the no-DV-in-your-past policy, but rather is willing to look at each player on a case-by-case basis and evaluate whether they believe that player can and has learned from their mistake, and whether they are worthy of a second chance. He could have said that the team acknowledges Clark's DV history, but believes he can and will redeem himself.

Had he done this, the conversation then becomes not whether Schneider is a lying buffoon who led a piss-poor investigation and has lost his credibility, to a very interesting and meaningful debate as to whether a young man who gets involved in DV deserves a second chance. It would have been a way for the team to accept accountability for drafting a player with this history and it gives the player a chance to turn his life around.

 

[two dog]

If this event had the weight the Seattle Times witch hunt claims, grandmother
Goodell would have never allowed Clark to be anywhere near the scouting
combine, let alone the draft.

They dealt with the police report by simply omitting anything that did not
agree with their pre-concieved conclusion. The Times article relied heavily
on the opinions of two busybodies who looked into the room and assumed
they then knew what happened.

The young lady the Times is carrying the sword and shield for refused
medical treatment and declined to file a complaint. I also have read that
at the present time she ain't talkin' to nobody.The phone at her currently
listed number was answered by an unidentified male who immediately
hung up.

Am I biased by my Seahawk fandom ? Probably.....but it's still a witch hunt.

 

[hawknation2015]

JS really comes out of this whole thing looking like a horse's ass

Not quite yet... but close. Depends on what comes next.
I'm torn between his public explanation versus him just laying low. Depends on the background of what JS saw/heard. I believe that Allen was in on this decision based on what I've read. It'd be the ultimate lame move to throw Schneider under the bus when it probably wasn't his call alone.

He just handled the initial press conference so poorly. When he was confronted with what he had previously said about the team's DV policy, he either lied about what he knows happened with Clark or displayed some seriously pathetic beneficial ignorance. The way he then described the half-assed investigation the team did also really did not help. We all know some DV went down in that room. A large man hurt a woman much smaller than he.

What JS should have done rather than his embarrassing and tone-deaf response is acknowledge that the team is no longer holding firm on the no-DV-in-your-past policy, but rather is willing to look at each player on a case-by-case basis and evaluate whether they believe that player can and has learned from their mistake, and whether they are worthy of a second chance. He could have said that the team acknowledges Clark's DV history, but believes he can and will redeem himself.

Had he done this, the conversation then becomes not whether Schneider is a lying buffoon who led a piss-poor investigation and has lost his credibility, to a very interesting and meaningful debate as to whether a young man who gets involved in DV deserves a second chance. It would have been a way for the team to accept accountability for drafting a player with this history and it gives the player a chance to turn his life around.

I agree with you that it was inappropriate for Schenider to say Clark never hit her, especially since the team had only talked to Clark.

But I disagree with you about this being a DV case. He was only found guilty of disorderly conduct. If he "female dog" slapped her, causing the injury on the side of her face, it's pretty clear from that facts that he was provoked and at least in part acting out of self defense. He went beyond what was necessary to restrain her, hence his disorderly conduct conviction. This doesn't make him an evil person or a woman beater. It just means he messed up in the heat of the moment; hopefully he has owned up to it and learned how to avoid these situations in the future.

 

[Northwest Seahawk]

He's square with the police and there are no pending charges that's it that's all . The media are going to take there shots and it will be over in a few days. The off field stuff doesn't concern me much since he's been cleared with the Police.

 

[hawknation2015]

JS really comes out of this whole thing looking like a horse's ass

Not quite yet... but close. Depends on what comes next.
I'm torn between his public explanation versus him just laying low. Depends on the background of what JS saw/heard. I believe that Allen was in on this decision based on what I've read. It'd be the ultimate lame move to throw Schneider under the bus when it probably wasn't his call alone.

He just handled the initial press conference so poorly. When he was confronted with what he had previously said about the team's DV policy, he either lied about what he knows happened with Clark or displayed some seriously pathetic beneficial ignorance. The way he then described the half-assed investigation the team did also really did not help. We all know some DV went down in that room. A large man hurt a woman much smaller than he.

What JS should have done rather than his embarrassing and tone-deaf response is acknowledge that the team is no longer holding firm on the no-DV-in-your-past policy, but rather is willing to look at each player on a case-by-case basis and evaluate whether they believe that player can and has learned from their mistake, and whether they are worthy of a second chance. He could have said that the team acknowledges Clark's DV history, but believes he can and will redeem himself.

Had he done this, the conversation then becomes not whether Schneider is a lying buffoon who led a piss-poor investigation and has lost his credibility, to a very interesting and meaningful debate as to whether a young man who gets involved in DV deserves a second chance. It would have been a way for the team to accept accountability for drafting a player with this history and it gives the player a chance to turn his life around.

I agree with you that it was inappropriate for Schenider to say Clark never hit her, especially since the team had only talked to Clark.

But I disagree with you about this being a DV case. He was only found guilty of disorderly conduct. If he "female dog" slapped her, causing the injury on the side of her face, it's pretty clear from that facts that he was provoked and at least in part acting out of self defense. He went beyond what was necessary to restrain her, hence his disorderly conduct conviction. This doesn't make him an evil person or a woman beater. It just means he messed up in the heat of the moment; hopefully he has owned up to it and learned how to avoid these situations in the future.

 

[Scottemojo]

JS really comes out of this whole thing looking like a horse's ass

Not quite yet... but close. Depends on what comes next.
I'm torn between his public explanation versus him just laying low. Depends on the background of what JS saw/heard. I believe that Allen was in on this decision based on what I've read. It'd be the ultimate lame move to throw Schneider under the bus when it probably wasn't his call alone.

He just handled the initial press conference so poorly. When he was confronted with what he had previously said about the team's DV policy, he either lied about what he knows happened with Clark or displayed some seriously pathetic beneficial ignorance. The way he then described the half-assed investigation the team did also really did not help. We all know some DV went down in that room. A large man hurt a woman much smaller than he.

What JS should have done rather than his embarrassing and tone-deaf response is acknowledge that the team is no longer holding firm on the no-DV-in-your-past policy, but rather is willing to look at each player on a case-by-case basis and evaluate whether they believe that player can and has learned from their mistake, and whether they are worthy of a second chance. He could have said that the team acknowledges Clark's DV history, but believes he can and will redeem himself.

Had he done this, the conversation then becomes not whether Schneider is a lying buffoon who led a piss-poor investigation and has lost his credibility, to a very interesting and meaningful debate as to whether a young man who gets involved in DV deserves a second chance. It would have been a way for the team to accept accountability for drafting a player with this history and it gives the player a chance to turn his life around.

I agree with you that it was inappropriate for Schenider to say Clark never hit her, especially since the team had only talked to Clark.

But I disagree with you about this being a DV case. He was only found guilty of disorderly conduct. If he "female dog" slapped her, causing the injury on the side of her face, it's pretty clear from that facts that he was provoked and at least in part acting out of self defense. He went beyond what was necessary to restrain her, hence his disorderly conduct conviction. This doesn't make him an evil person or a woman beater. It just means he messed up in the heat of the moment; hopefully he has owned up to it and learned how to avoid these situations in the future.

I still fail to understand why she was not charged with DV. She instigated, she escalated.

 

[AbsolutNET]

I still fail to understand why she was not charged with DV. She instigated, she escalated.

You know why.