Seattle GM gets caught lying about Frank Clark and Domestic Violence

What makes this situation worse is that this dude's gonna be a monster for them.

Does Michigan have a better investigators than the Hawks? Because they booted him off the team shortly after the incident...

.... only to have tge Hawks turn around and give this guys millions

Over on .nuthouse their calling Clark a victim. Is this real life? A 6-2 235 pound DE is a victim of a girl one third his size? Like he couldn't have just walked a way. Instead he beats her up in front of her two little brothers. Pathetic.

What's even more pathetic is that the 1-2's will go to great lengths to spin this.I understand that they want to be known as super fans but cmon there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

As a father of a little girl, I probably would've killed that POS.

Originally posted by maltz88:

Originally posted by WRATHman44:
He stated that they conducted a thorough investigation, but they did not interview the victim, her brothers, the two eyewitnesses who called 911, hotel security, or the responding officer. That is a lie.

He has stated numerous times that there is no place on their roster for a man who strikes a woman, and EVERYone in this case knows he hit her. Clark, the DA, Hurt, etc. No one will directly say he didn't do it. That means he hit her. They hospital report on her injuries indicated they could have only been caused by a man twice her size, and he was the only one of those ON THAT FLOOR OF THE HOTEL. Drink your Kool Aid, super fan, but if you dig into this AT ALL, you'll know he did it, and that they can't help but know he did it by now. Even if they intentionally conducted a piss poor investigation to avoid finding out tht he hit her, they HAVE TO know by now, thanks to the Seattle Times, that he definitely hit her. A lot. Next move is on your team's leadership. Hint: I bet they don't cut him.

Maybe you have a different definition of a lie? Unless you're trying to argue the definition of thorough?

I believe the police, and the DA, who are actually qualified to interview victims did interview the witnesses and victim, which the team was able to review. Would it make sense to re-interview witnesses and victims if they've already been asked the questions you were set to ask?

I'm not trying to defend the pick. Just simply saying I haven't read anything that could be called a lie from what the team had said.

The whole pick is a head scratcher to me.

First, as Lisa said, it seems the team is really sticking their neck out on this one. Almost unnecessarily. Not sure why they'd do this to take a player that doesn't fill a need, and seems like an ok talent. But does not seem like a good dude. He was not convicted of domestic violence, but reading between the lines, it sure seems like something off kilter happened. Even if you want to put blinders on and say, he wasn't convicted, and the DA and police aren't willing to say he did hit her. He at the very least is a thief. Not the personality I'd be excited to bring into my locker room.

Second, the thing that seems really odd to me with this pick, is I had literally never heard of Frank Clark until they turned their pick in. Granted I hadn't followed this draft class as closely this year as I do most years. But his name was not out there as taboo that I had seen. In going back through draft publications, he was listed as anywhere from 2nd round to 5th, all said he's had "off field issues," but none that I saw listed him as undraftable. Seems odd to me that everyone was projecting him to be drafted, but once he was drafted, Seattle is getting vilified for it.

Again, I don't like the pick at all. Everything about it is just......weird. Judging by the reaction from the media, and fan base, there should have been something said about this guy before the draft that made him untouchable. Why is it such a big deal after the draft? Nothing changed. Maybe it's because they took him in the 2nd round?

Why do you suppose they bothered to talk to Clark about it if he was already interviewed by the police. Do you think they surmised he could tell them more about the incident than what they read on the police report? Do you think that same logic could be applied to anyone else who was there? Why do you suppose it wasn't? It was an intentionally incomplete investigation. That makes the statement a lie.

I notice you didn't offer much to address the other lie, that there is no room on the roster for a man who strikes a woman. Clark never stated to the press that he didn't hit her, and they asked him directly several times. That means he hit her. The DA never said he didn't hit Hurt, and the DA was asked directly several times. That means he hit her. Frank Clark is still on your roster.

Originally posted by Cooper22:

What makes this situation worse is that this dude's gonna be a monster for them.

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe he beats up another girl or steal some other s**t leading to his arrest.

Originally posted by maltz88:

Maybe you have a different definition of a lie? Unless you're trying to argue the definition of thorough?

I believe the police, and the DA, who are actually qualified to interview victims did interview the witnesses and victim, which the team was able to review. Would it make sense to re-interview witnesses and victims if they've already been asked the questions you were set to ask?

I'm not trying to defend the pick. Just simply saying I haven't read anything that could be called a lie from what the team had said.

The whole pick is a head scratcher to me.

First, as Lisa said, it seems the team is really sticking their neck out on this one. Almost unnecessarily. Not sure why they'd do this to take a player that doesn't fill a need, and seems like an ok talent. But does not seem like a good dude. He was not convicted of domestic violence, but reading between the lines, it sure seems like something off kilter happened. Even if you want to put blinders on and say, he wasn't convicted, and the DA and police aren't willing to say he did hit her. He at the very least is a thief. Not the personality I'd be excited to bring into my locker room.

Second, the thing that seems really odd to me with this pick, is I had literally never heard of Frank Clark until they turned their pick in. Granted I hadn't followed this draft class as closely this year as I do most years. But his name was not out there as taboo that I had seen. In going back through draft publications, he was listed as anywhere from 2nd round to 5th, all said he's had "off field issues," but none that I saw listed him as undraftable. Seems odd to me that everyone was projecting him to be drafted, but once he was drafted, Seattle is getting vilified for it.

Again, I don't like the pick at all. Everything about it is just......weird. Judging by the reaction from the media, and fan base, there should have been something said about this guy before the draft that made him untouchable. Why is it such a big deal after the draft? Nothing changed. Maybe it's because they took him in the 2nd round?

It would make sense to re ask those same questions as many ways as you possibly could if your going to allow this player to represent your organization and pay him a lot of money. Unless you don't have a problem with domestic abuse that is.
I respect the fact that you don't like the pick and I respect the fact that your backing your favorite team but everything else is indefensible.

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:
Over on .nuthouse their calling Clark a victim. Is this real life? A 6-2 235 pound DE is a victim of a girl one third his size? Like he couldn't have just walked a way. Instead he beats her up in front of her two little brothers. Pathetic.

What's even more pathetic is that the 1-2's will go to great lengths to spin this.I understand that they want to be known as super fans but cmon there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

I agree, I read through the Seahawks.net thread and I rolled my eyes countless times at the spin job that was going on by the majority of the posters.

However, that said... when Ray McDonald was charged, there were a lot of posters on the Webzone that had similar rationalizations. "Some women just look for trouble and are looking for a quick payday", "too many girls cry rape these days", etc... now, one could say that Ray and those posters were vindicated because he ultimately wasn't charged, but the point is that many posters went to great lengths to make excuses for him. Frankly, though, I was disgusted a lot of the reactions on our site.

Originally posted by theduke85:

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Over on .nuthouse their calling Clark a victim. Is this real life? A 6-2 235 pound DE is a victim of a girl one third his size? Like he couldn't have just walked a way. Instead he beats her up in front of her two little brothers. Pathetic.

What's even more pathetic is that the 1-2's will go to great lengths to spin this.I understand that they want to be known as super fans but cmon there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

I agree, I read through the Seahawks.net thread and I rolled my eyes countless times at the spin job that was going on by the majority of the posters.

However, that said... when Ray McDonald was charged, there were a lot of posters on the Webzone that had similar rationalizations. "Some women just look for trouble and are looking for a quick payday", "too many girls cry rape these days", etc... now, one could say that Ray and those posters were vindicated because he ultimately wasn't charged, but the point is that many posters went to great lengths to make excuses for him. Frankly, though, I was disgusted a lot of the reactions on our site.

I might have missed the pictures of Ray McDonalds chick with a lump on her face and marks on her body. Can you post the pics? Or maybe a report of the incident, where witnesses claimed that they witnessed him beating her up? Or the girls little brother thinking that Ray had killed his sister?

Also, when that happened a lot of posters were asking Baalke to cut him ASAP, my self included. My point is that over on their site only one person was disgusted by their management decision to draft him. So, really it's not even near the same situation. As you mentioned Ray was cleared of the incident so the few that defended him were right in doing so. In this case there is way, WAY too much evidence that he beat her up. They even gave her an alcohol test to make sure she wasn't testifying under the influence. But saying all that ,I get what you're getting at.

Had their been witnesses saying Ray McDonald killed her or people who witnessed Rays girl knocked out on the ground its a different situation then light bruising around the neck.

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
The only really surprising part of this to me is their initial proclamation about having no room for anybody on the roster who lays their hands on a woman, when their much celebrated offensive line coach is an admitted abuser of women himself.

Wow. That is hypocrisy!

The rage reported in the attack was probably a positive intangible in Pete's scouting eye.

*gum smacks* "Yo baby . . let's harness that on the field" *gum smacks*

Originally posted by maltz88:
This.

I think every GM and coach in the league are car salesmen and spin doctors. PC and JS are certainly no different, and are probably more so than a lot of them.

Can't argue this. Most every team is guilty in some way. Look at what Dallas has done for instance. We aren't flawless either

Originally posted by Bluesbro:

Schneider straight up talking out of his ass. Saying that there was arguing and shouting going on that led to the cops being called which led to a disorderly misconduct charge. Wow. then goes to say that he knows for a fact that he didn't hit her

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Originally posted by Bluesbro:

Schneider straight up talking out of his ass. Saying that there was arguing and shouting going on that led to the cops being called which led to a disorderly misconduct charge. Wow. then goes to say that he knows for a fact that he didn't hit her

So, that's obviously lie #3. There is no possible way for someone to spin that as a true statement. JS should be burned by Seattle media for this (won't happen), or at least outed by national media (won't happen). Can you imagine how Bay Area media would attack this?

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:
I might have missed the pictures of Ray McDonalds chick with a lump on her face and marks on her body. Can you post the pics? Or maybe a report of the incident, where witnesses claimed that they witnessed him beating her up? Or the girls little brother thinking that Ray had killed his sister?

Also, when that happened a lot of posters were asking Baalke to cut him ASAP, my self included. My point is that over on their site only one person was disgusted by their management decision to draft him. So, really it's not even near the same situation. As you mentioned Ray was cleared of the incident so the few that defended him were right in doing so. In this case there is way, WAY too much evidence that he beat her up. They even gave her an alcohol test to make sure she wasn't testifying under the influence. But saying all that ,I get what you're getting at.

It is all devils advocacy to me. He should have been more embarrassed by all the witch hunters here and in the media from politicians to women's groups to everyone that toasted us when Ray was arrested and retained. I knew that the team knew something was wrong with the womans claim on Ray and that there were witnesses everywhere to corroborate Rays story. There was no way we were holding onto Ray of he was guilty. It was shameful on account of he say she say Ray was guilty here. Not nearly enough evidence to even think that definitively.

In this instance it almost draws parallels to Greg Hardy or even Ray Rice because you have evidence of physical violence and you have witnesses to it. It is hard to give this guy the same benefit of doubt Ray was given.