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

[GawksAtHawks]

The way you talk makes it sound like a man who beats his wife unconscious is a victim. Where do you draw the line? Is Aaron Hernandez too a victim who just needs counseling, or does that just go for those who commit acts of violence towards women? Because to me a wife beater deserves jail time, during which the counseling should take place.

And I'm not talking about Clark here, but the likes of Rice.

I have the exact same stance as the NFL. No second chances for rapists, murderers, or batterers. But a guy who makes one mistake in a DV case who wants to get better and make it right- he'll usually receive mercy from the league after his punishment is served. Which is I think the optimal way to handle these situations and serves the greater good.

Couldn't agree more with you Kearly. Thats why judges have more then one punishment for a crime. Circumstances dictate the punishment. Part of the reason we need judges in the first place...

 

[Scottemojo]

Lawrence Taylor would have been suspended from today's NFL for good within his first 3 years.

 

[jlwaters1]

To be clear, if Hawks fans are fine with the team giving him a "second chance" I'm sincerely not objecting to that. It's not what my response was when what seemed to be a similar case happened with my favorite team (I wanted them to cut McDonald immediately), but it's truly a matter of opinion about what behavior is and isn't deserving of "second chances."

Instead, the ONLY thing I'm objecting to is those who are trying to argue that this isn't even a "second chance" by insisting that Clark didn't do anything wrong in the first place. A "second chance" I'm fine with, that he never did anything wrong in the first place so he doesn't even need a "second chance" is just too far me.

YES - nail on the head and as a Seahawk fan I agree. The excuses for this incident sickens me even more than the incident itself. It is what enables people to continue hitting women. The fact that excuses are made up and accepted. To say that throwing a remote should have gotten her arrested and it justifies him forcefully restraining her on the bed and to go on from there.

Right, because she just tossed the remote at him and calmly sat down to read her bible. You know what's disgusting to me, as a Seahawks fan? People who can only see black and white and who are so easily cajoled into a witch hunt. Yes, actual DV and battery of women...of ANYONE...is horrible. HORRIBLE. But the fact is that two people of the opposite sex getting into an ugly altercation, a fight, does not equal domestic violence. It really is that simple.

No doubt the women in the next room heard something really dreadful and were freaked out. No doubt everyone in Clark's room was really freaked out. No doubt that after the episodes of Rice and Peterson last year that everyone from the media to fans is freaked out. Even so, cooler heads have to prevail. Cooler heads like the police, the DA, the courts, and people like John Schneider.

Go ring your hands over this all you want, it's a terrible situation made worse by all the sensation that's followed, but kindly leave off with your sanctimonious "as a Seahawks fan...." nonsense. This is your problem as a person and if it puts your "fan" status at risk then feel free to check your card in at the door. The reason you and the media want Clark to bow down on his knees and ask for a second chance is because it makes you feel good, no matter the actual reality of the situation.

Great post!

 

[jlwaters1]

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seah ... irlfriend/

Evidently the prosecutor felt the same way as PC AND JS. There's obviously more to the story than what's spelled out in the police report.

 

[LymonHawk]

Are you sure where L80 is concerned they were actually women?

I'm not even sure L80 is woman? :mrgreen:

Which does bring up another question: Has anyone noticed any posts on this thread from any of our female members?

 

[12thbrah]

What the prosecutor says completely goes with what schneider and carroll have been saying all this time. Hopefully the press will start move past this issue now.

 

[Hawkscanner]

I have a bit of a unique perspective when it comes to these kinds of things. Like the prosecutor alluded to, I know from firsthand experience that things are very rarely as they appear to be. I'm a teacher by trade now, but before that I worked in the field of Social Service for 14 years. I have a Master's in Counseling and during those years worked for various agencies as a therapist, mental health case manager, and social worker. I got my feet wet while I was still in college, doing work study for CPS -- and that served me very well years later when I worked as a case manager for a Foster Care agency. I've read a lot of confidential files during my lifetime, nearly all of which would break your heart. If they ended up on my desk and on my case load, they read very ugly. I've seen, read, and worked with situations that many people wouldn’t believe and frankly can’t handle. Because of confidentiality, I can’t talk a great deal about the people nor give a whole lot of in depth details about the many cases I worked with. Suffice it to say, I’ve seen and worked with a lot of situations and things that would keep a lot of people up at night – yes, Domestic Violence included and the innocent young victims of DV on countless occasions. I understand Domestic Violence both from the standpoint of the victims (as I used to counsel those people) … and from the standpoint of the perpetrators (as I counseled those people as well).

Anyway, one of the things that I learned very early in my career was to always be objective and to keep an open mind – no matter the circumstances. When I first got in to the field, I can’t tell you the number of times that I would talk with a client, a family member, a case worker, etc. and be absolutely convinced of the truth of something – until I talked to the next person. Often times that next conversation would provide new details and give a whole different perspective on the situation. I found that to very much be the case with police reports, CPS reports, and court documents as well. While those were instructive, I learned over time to take some of those incidences that those reports would contain with a grain of salt. Why? Well, it’s because when I started conducting my own inquiries in to some of those alleged incidences, I would often find that things weren’t always what they appeared to be. I’ll give you an actual example (and one that’s fairly generic enough that won’t get me in to trouble). I remember many years ago, I got a teenager on my case load who (according to his file) had displayed violent tendencies in the past. One of the anecdotes in that report that was cited as evidence of his violent nature was the fact that he had once pulled a knife on a family member and threatened to kill him. Because of that, the entire agency I was working with took the word of that report and of the CPS worker at face value that this was in fact a violent young man – and that we should treat him as such. Well, I ended up doing my own investigation in to the matter and guess what? I found out that the reason that he had done that was that he was trying to protect his mother from an abusive relative who trying to harm her. That revelation obviously changed everything in how we chose to deal with that young man.

I found over time that CPS Reports, Police Reports, Court Documents, etc. often are littered with that kind of stuff. They can often read quite ugly and not everything contained within those reports is as it appears to be. Stories can get reported and because of insufficient or flat out lazy investigation, the actual facts of what truly occurred can get misrepresented. Those same stories can get recycled and end up in different reports and eventually you can end up with this pretty distorted picture. It's like the telephone game. There is a name for this in the Social Service Field – Chart Lore. And the sad truth is that very few professionals out there go to the lengths that I often went to peel back the layers of the onion to separate myth from reality. Mostly that’s because they are extremely overworked and in all honesty don’t have the time to do so.

Long story to say – never be quick to jump to conclusions. You might find that seemingly solid bridge will give way under your feet.

 

[olyfan63]

And Janay's. Janay wants to move on and start healing. For the rest of her life her husband is gonna be one of the most disgraced people in America. Some of that disgrace falls on her as well.

Anyway, my point is that she'd want her husband to have a second chance. She's said so, and passionately.

Yes, she is the victim to feel sorry for. But not punishing the perpetrator is not an act of compassion, as you paint it.

Exactly how is it that Ray Rice has not been punished, and then some:?

The irony is that his punishment has made far more of a victim out of the woman involved, by taking away her man's livelihood. She chose to stay with him after the incident. If the do-gooders actually cared about the specific woman, then the obvious choice would be to want Ray Rice to get back into the league, to be better able to support her. But no, the truth of the matter is that Janay Palmer is just cannon-fodder for the lying DV *industry* psychopaths, and none of them really give a hoot about Janay Palmer-Rice; she's just useless roadkill to them now.

So tell us again how you are so very concerned for the well-being of Janay Palmer?

 

[olyfan63]

To be clear, if Hawks fans are fine with the team giving him a "second chance" I'm sincerely not objecting to that. It's not what my response was when what seemed to be a similar case happened with my favorite team (I wanted them to cut McDonald immediately), but it's truly a matter of opinion about what behavior is and isn't deserving of "second chances."

Instead, the ONLY thing I'm objecting to is those who are trying to argue that this isn't even a "second chance" by insisting that Clark didn't do anything wrong in the first place. A "second chance" I'm fine with, that he never did anything wrong in the first place so he doesn't even need a "second chance" is just too far me.

YES - nail on the head and as a Seahawk fan I agree. The excuses for this incident sickens me even more than the incident itself. It is what enables people to continue hitting women. The fact that excuses are made up and accepted. To say that throwing a remote should have gotten her arrested and it justifies him forcefully restraining her on the bed and to go on from there.

Both you guys need to experience a Borderline Personality Disorder psychobitch to have any real clue about all this. One false allegation and your life is turned into hamburger overnight, and the actual facts don't matter. It just takes one malicious false *female* accuser. No matter if she's mentally ill, "the system" will treat her every utterance against you as gospel, and you will be utterly screwed. Even if you're eventually cleared, your life will still be hamburger.

Don't think it could happen to you? Just Google "Duke Lacrosse false allegations" and read a few of the articles. Things haven't really changed that much.

Stop putting ALL women on a ridiculous pedestal that they don't deserve any more or less than men do. The fact that SOME women truly ARE victims abused by EVIL MEN doesn't mean that ALL WOMEN tell the truth when they accuse.

If you are with a good woman who doesn't have the kind of character to falsely accuse, and doesn't have the emotional volatility to initiate a physical altercation, then good for you and count your lucky stars. Many guys aren't so lucky, thinking with the wrong head and all that.

Both you guys pretty much recite the Gender Feminist party line in this thread. Try getting past your emotions about evil things you've seen (or just been told about, true or not) in the past and assuming that's the story here. Start applying some critical thinking skills, instead of starting with an agenda and trying to interpret everything to fit that agenda.

 

[olyfan63]

No doubt the women in the next room heard something really dreadful and were freaked out. No doubt everyone in Clark's room was really freaked out. No doubt that after the episodes of Rice and Peterson last year that everyone from the media to fans is freaked out. Even so, cooler heads have to prevail. Cooler heads like the police, the DA, the courts, and people like John Schneider.

Go ring your hands over this all you want, it's a terrible situation made worse by all the sensation that's followed, but kindly leave off with your sanctimonious "as a Seahawks fan...." nonsense. This is your problem as a person and if it puts your "fan" status at risk then feel free to check your card in at the door. The reason you and the media want Clark to bow down on his knees and ask for a second chance is because it makes you feel good, no matter the actual reality of the situation.

What makes you think that you can put words in my mouth? Where did I say this put my fan status at risk?

What makes you think you know ANYTHING about what makes me feel the way I feel? Did I say what you feel? No I said what I feel about others thoughts on this

And on this site don't make personal attacks - I didn't have a problem as a person. I now have a problem with YOU

Sure, you're holier-than-thou, never make personal attacks, we get it, you're pure, just like the 100% of women you purport to defend.

Fair enough, but a lot of us guys have a problem with clueless white knights, which is an apt description of how you are conducting yourself in this thread.

Just because you may have had an experience with an abusive woman-beater in your personal life doesn't mean that's always the story, and certainly doesn't mean it's the story here in the Frank Clark scenario.

 

[Rocket]

I too am pure... it's both a gift and a burden.

 

[olyfan63]

The problem is that this is a no win situation.

JS should have never acknowledged it.

He should have made the following statement:

"We picked Frank Clark because he is a tremendous football player and we feel that his addition will help the team. We felt that his talent and ability at that draft slot was too valuable to overlook. We added him to the team and believe that Frank will conduct himself so that he adheres to all that being a Seahawk requires."

The rest of the issues and concerns brought up should have been referred to the above statement. Eventually the concern would have died down because there would have been nothing to fan the flames.

<snip>

And if the NFL was THAT concerned with DV, they should take all the money they are pouring into that stupid campaign and pour it into getting shelters funded and resources to move people from the DV shelters out into productive spaces where they are secure + self supporting. That IS a need, and one that most people can get behind.

Loved your suggested statement for John Schneider. However, maybe he carefully crafted his approach in consultation with the same 3 gender feminist attorneys that were at Roger Goodell's table during discussions on the Greg Hardy mess. If the actual objective was to generate media attention and public emotion, then Schneider's approach is genius.

And by the way, a huge share of the population at DV shelters are mentally ill women who aren't battered at all. They may be mentally ill, but they are still smart enough to realize all they have to do is say "I was abused!" and they have a place to stay and meals and a way better setup than a mere "homeless shelter".

 

[olyfan63]

I too am pure... it's both a gift and a burden.

I indeed sense your purity throughout this thread, and I am simply in awe. You and Mother Theresa, two of a kind. Well, not totally, as you are male and above ground, but hey, don't be sad, 1 out 3 ain't bad. Cue the Meatloaf, minor lyrics change.

 

[Hawkscanner]

Both you guys need to experience a Borderline Personality Disorder psychobitch to have any real clue about all this. One false allegation and your life is turned into hamburger overnight, and the actual facts don't matter. It just takes one malicious false *female* accuser. No matter if she's mentally ill, "the system" will treat her every utterance against you as gospel, and you will be utterly screwed. Even if you're eventually cleared, your life will still be hamburger.

Don't think it could happen to you? Just Google "Duke Lacrosse false allegations" and read a few of the articles. Things haven't really changed that much.

Stop putting ALL women on a ridiculous pedestal that they don't deserve any more or less than men do. The fact that SOME women truly ARE victims abused by EVIL MEN doesn't mean that ALL WOMEN tell the truth when they accuse.

If you are with a good woman who doesn't have the kind of character to falsely accuse, and doesn't have the emotional volatility to initiate a physical altercation, then good for you and count your lucky stars. Many guys aren't so lucky, thinking with the wrong head and all that.

Both you guys pretty much recite the Gender Feminist party line in this thread. Try getting past your emotions about evil things you've seen (or just been told about, true or not) in the past and assuming that's the story here. Start applying some critical thinking skills, instead of starting with an agenda and trying to interpret everything to fit that agenda.

Good lord, Yes. I dealt with many a flaming Borderline woman when I was case managing. The saying is true in the case of those women -- keep your friends close and your enemies even closer. The last thing you want to do is to piss those lovely ladies off because absolutely, they will carve you up. Think Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction (that's an extreme case, but there most certainly are women out there like that). The phrase "heaven hath no fury like a woman scorned" -- never a truer word was said. There ARE women out there who will seek to absolutely destroy a person's life with unbelievable venom and vengeance ... and then flip on a dime within minutes and declare their undying love and devotion.

Now, is that the case with this particular woman? Is she like that? I have no idea in this particular case. I just know that what's being said is absolutely true that there most certainly ARE women out there who will and absolutely do destroy lives. There are women out there who are so subtle, so manipulative, and will make up and propagate the most vicious and devastating lies without batting an eye. If you've never had the "pleasure" of being involved with a woman like that, pray that you don't. You just might find yourself wishing for death.

 

[two dog]

Municipal prosecutor for the city of Sandusky Ohio Lynn Gast-King was
quoted in Wed. may 6 Seattle times story.
She said: "The facts are not as they initially appeared".

Play Misty for me.

 

[TwilightError]

The way you talk makes it sound like a man who beats his wife unconscious is a victim. Where do you draw the line? Is Aaron Hernandez too a victim who just needs counseling, or does that just go for those who commit acts of violence towards women? Because to me a wife beater deserves jail time, during which the counseling should take place.

And I'm not talking about Clark here, but the likes of Rice.

I have the exact same stance as the NFL. No second chances for rapists, murderers, or batterers. But a guy who makes one mistake in a DV case who wants to get better and make it right- he'll usually receive mercy from the league after his punishment is served. Which is I think the optimal way to handle these situations and serves the greater good.

OK. So no second chance for Rice is something we agree upon then. Because he very very clearly is a batterer, no matter what his wife teamed up with lawyers and professional writers says in a very calculated letter.

 

[McGruff]

I have a bit of a unique perspective when it comes to these kinds of things. Like the prosecutor alluded to, I know from firsthand experience that things are very rarely as they appear to be. I'm a teacher by trade now, but before that I worked in the field of Social Service for 14 years. I have a Master's in Counseling and during those years worked for various agencies as a therapist, mental health case manager, and social worker. I got my feet wet while I was still in college, doing work study for CPS -- and that served me very well years later when I worked as a case manager for a Foster Care agency. I've read a lot of confidential files during my lifetime, nearly all of which would break your heart. If they ended up on my desk and on my case load, they read very ugly. I've seen, read, and worked with situations that many people wouldn’t believe and frankly can’t handle. Because of confidentiality, I can’t talk a great deal about the people nor give a whole lot of in depth details about the many cases I worked with. Suffice it to say, I’ve seen and worked with a lot of situations and things that would keep a lot of people up at night – yes, Domestic Violence included and the innocent young victims of DV on countless occasions. I understand Domestic Violence both from the standpoint of the victims (as I used to counsel those people) … and from the standpoint of the perpetrators (as I counseled those people as well).

Anyway, one of the things that I learned very early in my career was to always be objective and to keep an open mind – no matter the circumstances. When I first got in to the field, I can’t tell you the number of times that I would talk with a client, a family member, a case worker, etc. and be absolutely convinced of the truth of something – until I talked to the next person. Often times that next conversation would provide new details and give a whole different perspective on the situation. I found that to very much be the case with police reports, CPS reports, and court documents as well. While those were instructive, I learned over time to take some of those incidences that those reports would contain with a grain of salt. Why? Well, it’s because when I started conducting my own inquiries in to some of those alleged incidences, I would often find that things weren’t always what they appeared to be. I’ll give you an actual example (and one that’s fairly generic enough that won’t get me in to trouble). I remember many years ago, I got a teenager on my case load who (according to his file) had displayed violent tendencies in the past. One of the anecdotes in that report that was cited as evidence of his violent nature was the fact that he had once pulled a knife on a family member and threatened to kill him. Because of that, the entire agency I was working with took the word of that report and of the CPS worker at face value that this was in fact a violent young man – and that we should treat him as such. Well, I ended up doing my own investigation in to the matter and guess what? I found out that the reason that he had done that was that he was trying to protect his mother from an abusive relative who trying to harm her. That revelation obviously changed everything in how we chose to deal with that young man.

I found over time that CPS Reports, Police Reports, Court Documents, etc. often are littered with that kind of stuff. They can often read quite ugly and not everything contained within those reports is as it appears to be. Stories can get reported and because of insufficient or flat out lazy investigation, the actual facts of what truly occurred can get misrepresented. Those same stories can get recycled and end up in different reports and eventually you can end up with this pretty distorted picture. It's like the telephone game. There is a name for this in the Social Service Field – Chart Lore. And the sad truth is that very few professionals out there go to the lengths that I often went to peel back the layers of the onion to separate myth from reality. Mostly that’s because they are extremely overworked and in all honesty don’t have the time to do so.

Long story to say – never be quick to jump to conclusions. You might find that seemingly solid bridge will give way under your feet.

Thank you for this post, and it is a shame that it has been overlooked in this thread. As a pastor who has unfortunately had to walk with people through multiple court cases, I concur that this is often the case. I don't know the details of Frank's case (none of us do), and I certainly can't vouch for his innocence, but the police report is a snap shot in time that is one part of an investigation. It is an impression, a close-up photograph without context. The case itself takes in a broader picture which is not avaiable to the public unless the case goes to trial, and often not even then . . . I am often baffled by the details that courts choose to omit.

 

[TeamoftheCentury]

I've tried to read through as much as I can. Some good comments and I agree with those who are cautioning against jumping to conclusions.

(Of course) I am against DV. But, I seriously was HOPEFUL that the Seahawks would draft Frank Clark. However, I did not expect media scorn to this degree. I think the Seahawks are handling all the arrows flying at them remarkably well all things considered. If ANY other team would have drafted him, I would not have lambasted anyone. I would have been envious. I think he's going to be a steal of this draft and teams are going to regret passing on him - and perhaps especially for not looking more into it like the Seahawks did. There were other smart teams that were ready to draft him. But, the Seahawks got him before they could.

Watched that OTL piece. Bob Ley was partly just doing his job (sensationalize), but he only took the "against Frank Clark and the Seahawks for drafting him" position. There wasn't much in the way of fair representation. It's near slander if you ask me. Yes, an incident happened, but the emotionally charged hearsay purported is shameful. Mia Kimes of ESPN the Magazine wrongly stated that JS considers Frank Clark (outright) innocent. IIRC, JS never said that. He knows something happened. But, as stated in comments in this thread already, things are not always as they seem. JS may have come out and said that FC is innocent of actually purposely hitting the gal, but I don't recall him contending that FC is outright innocent. There was an altercation. The same things about the incident keep getting repeated, and it's more those who are starting from the vantage point that FC is some monster do not seem to consider they are drawing conclusions from their assumptions.

Saying that he gets a "2nd chance" can carry with it an assumed passive admission of guilt in the first place. If that was the case, JS/PC maintain they would not have drafted him. FC said to Seattle fans "Give me a chance" - not "Give me a 2nd chance". It's talked about in the media that FC has used up his 2nd chances. No matter what happened, Frank Clark needs to not put himself into positions where something happens and he runs the risk of being accused of anything. With a running log of his past, he's going to be scrutinized - whether that's fair or not.

I don't really care what his detractors think. My money is on Frank Clark to move beyond this. I'm rooting for the kid - not just to help my team, but to prove people wrong about him. He's in a great place to get all the support to be able to succeed.

So, my question is for those conducting a witch hunt... what would satisfy you in all this? Clark has gone through the job interview and got the gig. Yes, because of the accusations (we shouldn't honestly call it anything but that) and whether that's fair to Frank or not, he's going to have to be squeaky clean. No different than the expectations on all NFL players. But, he just can't afford to put any fuel on a fire that perhaps he didn't actually start.

 

[xgeoff]

I'm rooting for the kid ...

I'm rooting for the kid as well!

 

[ivotuk]

I'm rooting for him as well.

I am in no position to pass judgement on the young man as I've seen too many false accusations, as well as legitimate ones.

No one on this board has all the facts, only hearsay. I see these cases come through our building all the time, and there's a reason for trials, to do our best to bring about the truth.

Domestic Violence is a horrible thing, and many times it stems from an upbringing. "If dad's abusive to mom, maybe that's how it's done." The cycle needs to be broken, and you don't do that by convicting people in the court of public opinion.

Sooooo tired of the self-righteous just looking for a cause, something to be offended over. Never mind the facts.

There's an easy test you can do to figure out if an article about Frank Clark is legit, do they talk about his upbringing? What he has endured? Or is it all his fault, he's guilty and should not get a second chance based on what someone said, somewhere? How does that teach Frank Clark, or anyone else who made need help, to trust in others?

People who write in "news" papers rarely suffer outside of their suburban upbringing, so they have no clue what it's like, and they don't want to learn, only condemn.


Learn a little about Frank Clark:

"The neighborhood went bad and it became a violent place where gangs prowled and drug lords reigned.

It was no place for a young boy who was beginning to drift the wrong way. Frank is the middle child of seven in his family and noted that some of his older brothers couldn't escape poverty's despair, ending up in prison.

His mother, Teneka Clark, who had her own issues, didn't want that for Frank. And so she arranged for him to move to Cleveland with his father, Frank Clark, and his aunt and uncle, Regina and Sefton Bryant. The tough, blue-collar Midwestern city was hardly a family paradise, but it was a far cry better than "The Jungle" -- especially after little Frank moved out of his father's neighborhood to the more stable setting where the Bryants lived.

Frank says he hasn't gone back to L.A. because nothing good can happen for him there."


http://www.mgoblue.com/sports/m-footbl/ ... 14aad.html