OT- I give you Greg Hardy: Team Leader

[kalibane]

I'm not doing anything but sharing my interpretation as you asked. I know they were in response but to a direct question about Frank Clark but I think his words were as strong as they were due to the overall climate around domestic violence.

Had the Ray Rice story never dominated the landscape of the NFL last year I don't think his answer would be anywhere near that strong, thus he overplayed his hand. I'm not saying these are the facts, but that's my read on things.

[RiverDog]

I'm not doing anything but sharing my interpretation as you asked. I know they were in response but to a direct question about Frank Clark but I think his words were as strong as they were due to the overall climate around domestic violence.

Had the Ray Rice story never dominated the landscape of the NFL last year I don't think his answer would be anywhere near that strong, thus he overplayed his hand. I'm not saying these are the facts, but that's my read on things.

Actually I asked it in more of a yes or no fashion, whether or not John Schneider made up his "deal breaker" policy as part of his Frank Clark damage control effort or not, but I guess I can accept your interpretation as a yes, he did. No sense arguing semantics, I simply wanted to make a point and I think you understand where I'm coming from.

But I disagree with your take as to the timing of the drafting of Clark. IMO the fact that it came on the heels of the Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson, and Greg Hardy situations makes John Schneider's response worse, not better. He should have known that the press would be all over them when they drafted Clark, and should have chosen his words much more carefully. This wasn't a press conference where he was blind sided, it was an interview on Brock and Salk, and he had plenty of time to craft a response so he didn't have to overplay his hand. Pete, John, and anyone else that might be a spokesman for the Hawks should have all sat down and discussed how they were going to handle the enviable tough questions from the press so that they were all singing off the same page of music rather than being led into this zero tolerance deal breaker policy he advocated.

[kalibane]

I pretty much agree with you across the board Riv that's what's funny.

I think he made it up and I think he handled poorly... he should have seen that question coming and had a better answer for it.

[NorthHawk]

We all make mistakes. Maybe this was one of his but it just happened to be when talking to the media and said something that boxed him into a corner.
It's out there now, so he will have to live with any consequences that come up down the road.

[RiverDog]

Thanks, Kal. I wasn't trying to pursue you over this.

North, if this would have been an unscripted ad lib press conference like we see when Presidents are subjected to with scores of reporters shouting questions, then I can more easily understand how JS could have gotten boxed into that position and I could be more sympathetic. But if you'll listen to the interview, he really wasn't cornered or backed into anything. It was a one-on-one very casual interview with a local, Seahawks friendly reporter when JS came out and said that if a player strikes a woman that they will not be on their board. He goes on to talk about how they handled the Hardy situation, which I don't completely buy, either. He was trying to put lipstick on a pig.

Hopefully you folks can see how the situation with JS and Clark relates to the situation that Jerry Jones and the Cowboys now find themselves in regarding Hardy and why I've been so adamant about pressing some of you on it. We as Seahawks are not speaking from the summit of the mountain top in our criticism of Jerry Jones and the Cowboys if we can't admit to the failings of our own front office regarding a very recent, similar issue.

If I'm going to lecture someone about ethics and morals, I don't want to walk out there with my fly unzipped.

[SalmonBB]

Another difference between Hardy and Clark: one seems to be on the right path provided his second chance, while the other does not. Whatever you think about second chances, there seems a huge difference between the two in what they have chosen to do with theirs.

Count me as a fan of Clark.

GO SEAHAWKS!!!

[EmeraldBullet]

Another difference between Hardy and Clark: one seems to be on the right path provided his second chance, while the other does not. Whatever you think about second chances, there seems a huge difference between the two in what they have chosen to do with theirs.

Count me as a fan of Clark.

GO SEAHAWKS!!!

I'm going to withhold my opinion on Clark for a long time before I make up my mind, but he does seem to be doing better with his second chance. I have made up my mind on Hardy however...

[NorthHawk]

Here's all anyone needs to know about the difference in attitude between Clark and Hardy.

From PFT:
"Via Jimmy Kempski of PhillyVoice.com, Hardy changed his Twitter bio to say this: “Innocent until proven guilty-lack of knowledge & information is just ignorance-the unjust/prejudicial treatment of diff categories of people is discrimination.”"

He's in denial and he needs some help is all I can say.

[RiverDog]

Here's all anyone needs to know about the difference in attitude between Clark and Hardy.

From PFT:
"Via Jimmy Kempski of PhillyVoice.com, Hardy changed his Twitter bio to say this: “Innocent until proven guilty-lack of knowledge & information is just ignorance-the unjust/prejudicial treatment of diff categories of people is discrimination.”"

He's in denial and he needs some help is all I can say.

Odd because Hardy WAS found guilty in a court of law then had the verdict set aside on appeal, not by virtue of a trial by jury but rather after an out of court settlement.

[NorthHawk]

I think it points out he just doesn't get it at all.
He even thinks that buying off the witness equals innocence.

[RiverDog]

I think it points out he just doesn't get it at all.
He even thinks that buying off the witness equals innocence.

Agreed. If I'm his probation officer, I'd ask him what he meant by that tweet.

That social media stuff can be a curse as well as a blessing for many. I know of an individual that got fired because of a Facebook post.

[NorthHawk]

Is he on probation?
His record has been expunged, so I think he's just like you and me in his freedoms.

[RiverDog]

Is he on probation?
His record has been expunged, so I think he's just like you and me in his freedoms.

Yea, my bad. I was just thinking out loud.

All I have to say is that Hardy must have gotten himself a pretty darn good defense lawyer.

[kalibane]

Well good enough to get the bench trial set aside I'm not sure that takes a ton of skill. They had no choice to expunge his record once the accuser disappeared so what he really had was a good bank account.

[c_hawkbob]

Well good enough to get the bench trial set aside I'm not sure that takes a ton of skill. They had no choice to expunge his record once the accuser disappeared so what he really had was a good bank account.

Exactly, buy off the victim, the case goes away. It kinda sucks but hey, she's the one to whom the deed was done, if she got herself set for life by backing off, good for her.

[RiverDog]

The victim might be better off by doing what she did, ie take the money and run. It spares her of appearing in court, having her character attacked by a defense attorney and she may not have wanted the publicity. In many respects, I can sympathize with her. Without knowing how much money she received or if there was any permanent physical or psychological injuries to her, how much money she received and what she does with it, this settlement might be the best thing that ever happened to her.

The only problem is that it could enable a real animal and put another woman at risk. It would be a pretty tough choice for a person to make.

[EmeraldBullet]

The victim might be better off by doing what she did, ie take the money and run. It spares her of appearing in court, having her character attacked by a defense attorney and she may not have wanted the publicity. In many respects, I can sympathize with her. Without knowing how much money she received or if there was any permanent physical or psychological injuries to her, how much money she received and what she does with it, this settlement might be the best thing that ever happened to her.

The only problem is that it could enable a real animal and put another woman at risk. It would be a pretty tough choice for a person to make.

Money is one thing that many people cannot pass up. I bet she regrets this later in life. Though I do agree she got to avoid a lot of things I'm sure she didn't want made public and on record forever. It's still upsetting to me though because I would bet money that Hardy does do this again, even if he never gets called out for it.

As to my reservations about Clark, it has nothing to do with what he has done recently. It's just that it only takes one bad day, maybe some substances, and a bad decision can happen and ruin all the work he's made towards being a different person. I really hope he continues down the path he seems to be going, it's a difficult path to show others you have changed and only takes one mistake or misstep to undo all the progress.

[RiverDog]

Money is one thing that many people cannot pass up. I bet she regrets this later in life. Though I do agree she got to avoid a lot of things I'm sure she didn't want made public and on record forever. It's still upsetting to me though because I would bet money that Hardy does do this again, even if he never gets called out for it.

Hard to say. Not knowing what her financial situation was or what the payoff was, we really can't pass judgment on her decision.

Paying off victims is, sadly, a way of life in a democratic, capitalistic society. It's one of the prices we have to pay for having so many of the other freedoms that we cherish.

[EmeraldBullet]

Hard to say. Not knowing what her financial situation was or what the payoff was, we really can't pass judgment on her decision.

Paying off victims is, sadly, a way of life in a democratic, capitalistic society. It's one of the prices we have to pay for having so many of the other freedoms that we cherish.

My point is that no matter what her financial situation was, and how much the payoff was, generally most victims will come to regret taking the money. Sticking with your values transcends your financial situation. By taking the money you in sorts become a permanent victim. She made her choice and she will have to live with it, so it is what it is. Just saying most people that made her decision come to regret it. It really has nothing to do with the other freedoms that we cherish at all...

[RiverDog]

My point is that no matter what her financial situation was, and how much the payoff was, generally most victims will come to regret taking the money. Sticking with your values transcends your financial situation. By taking the money you in sorts become a permanent victim. She made her choice and she will have to live with it, so it is what it is. Just saying most people that made her decision come to regret it. It really has nothing to do with the other freedoms that we cherish at all...

I dunno, Em. Some women would just as soon put the incident behind them and get on with their lives. How many come to regret that decision, we really don't know. All I know is that it's easy for us males to sit here and speculate what a young woman is or isn't feeling, whether she should or shouldn't have taken the money, or whether or not she'll come to regret it.

The reason I made mention of our freedoms is that this is one of those incidents where the democratic principle of innocent until proven guilty has quite possibly put another woman at risk. If we lived in a more totalitarian society, there's no doubt that Hardy would be behind bars, if not worse, and the public would be much safer. It would be nice that in the case of rape that the victim not be required to testify in a court of law, but the accused has a right to face his accusers. Without those protections, the Duke lacrosse team would probably still be in prison.

[EmeraldBullet]

You make some good points there RD. I guess I just really hope Hardy gets his someday.

[kalibane]

Nice post RD. I had pretty much this same discussion with someone regarding rape. They were complaining about how people rally to the side of the rapist and how defense counsel would basically put the victim on trial and dredge up all manner of the victim's past.

Now personally I'm in favor of making the victim's past inadmissible unless they have a evidence of past false claims. But we don't get to set aside the principles our criminal justice system is supposed to be built on. In a domestic violence situation and especially rape, there often are no witnesses, no paper trail, no video so if there is no physical evidence it becomes one person's account versus another person's account. By nature they are difficult cases to prove.

And while false accusations are relatively rare, they do occur. It sucks for the victim for sure. But you can't operate by a guilty until proven innocent standard for this one crime just because it's traumatic to the victim. You don't want to see these guys go free but I'd rather have Greg Hardy walking around and be disgusted by it than sending some poor schlep to jail for 25 years after being falsely identified in a lineup or the rare case that the victim just has an axe to grind.

[NorthHawk]

Unfortunately, if Hardy didn't have any money and was innocent, he probably would have ended up in jail for 25 years.
That's a failing of the system as it currently is as well.

[RiverDog]

Unfortunately, if Hardy didn't have any money and was innocent, he probably would have ended up in jail for 25 years.
That's a failing of the system as it currently is as well.

That's true. But as in the innocent until proven guilty principle, what's the alternative? In this case, the victim is probably much happier than to have been beaten or raped by some poor guy as at least she is receiving some financial compensation for her suffering. Had she been raped by some homeless man, then there wouldn't be the pot of gold and she'd have to testify. And I certainly don't want the government telling me who I can hire as my attorney if I'm accused of something.

There are a lot of things we can do to improve or streamline the system, but when we boil it all down, as flawed as our justice system is, it's superior to many if not all others. I like quoting Churchill in these situations, who once said that democracy is the worst form of government ever conceived, except for everything else.

[Hawktawk]

Hardys victim said something I found interesting in her police interview. She said"THIS IS THE TIME, hes going to kill me" IMO she was inferring that it wasn't the first time he had been violent or threatening. So I wonder if there is a component of fear coupled with financial reward that kept her out of court.
Either way, if there's a dude who needs his head knocked sideways its this dirt bag. Its poetic justice the Cowboys are an O fer with him in the lineup. karma.

[RiverDog]

Hardys victim said something I found interesting in her police interview. She said"THIS IS THE TIME, hes going to kill me" IMO she was inferring that it wasn't the first time he had been violent or threatening. So I wonder if there is a component of fear coupled with financial reward that kept her out of court.
Either way, if there's a dude who needs his head knocked sideways its this dirt bag. Its poetic justice the Cowboys are an O fer with him in the lineup. karma.

Yea, that's kinda how it works in most crimes. The assailant hardly ever is caught the first time. It would not surprise me a bit if Hardy had abused this woman, or other women, multiple times. The other thing is that this sort of thing left unchecked tends to escalate. The more times they get away with it, the bolder they get. The first time it might just be a slap in the face, the next time a choke hold, the next a real beating. That's why it's so important that these things get reported.