On the Frank Clark controversy
.
Geoff Baker, a HOF-destined sportswriter, has two articles up. The first one questions whether the Seahawks had the ethical right to draft Frank Clark, in the 1st round or the 7th. The second article (commendably) quotes the prosecutor to the effect that Clark is fine.
A few questions, after which Mojo or anybody else can point the hapless Dr. D in the right direction:
......
OK, the Seahawks won't draft anybody who ever hit a woman -- even if our judicial system has already extracted the full penalty the man owes society.
Since when do we privatize the punishment of crime? When mob sentiment is the mechanism for calibrating a man's penalties, isn't that what they used to call a "lynching"?
......
If it is good and right for the Seahawks to avoid such a player then --- > it is good and right for each pro sports team to avoid him.
A lifetime ban from pro sports for getting into a wrangle with your wife that she started? I'm genuinely curious: how many of you guys would go for that? One slap and you're out, 20 years. For which other crimes would you attach this "Death Penalty"?
And if pro sports can ban you, why can't Boeing? Why can't every employer?
So the women have a blank check to inflict damage, right? Whale away, honey. If I block your punch too hard, I'm done for life.
......
Bear in mind that there is nothing I hate worse than bullies. A man who legitimately bullies a woman, in my world, gets horsewhipped in town square. No, I'm not kidding.
.......
Sure, if facts come out later -- like with the Ray Rice video -- then you revise your judgment to match the new facts.
Bill James defended Pete Rose, and it became part of his legacy. Most people thought it was embarrassing to James when Rose later admitted gambling. They're missing the point entirely.
.......
I'm not talking about whether the Seahawks showed due diligence. I have no idea whether they did. I wouldn't put it past them to lie about their due diligence. The NFL is not known for candor here. But my question on SSI is whether you have qualms rooting for Clark. Suppose he becomes a 14-sack-a-year man?
......
The prosecutor, in essence, serves as de facto judge for Clark here. She characterizes him as a good guy, characterizes the initial police reports as "way out of hand," and is perfectly comfortable that Clark's chance of abuse in the future is no more than yours or mine.
Why the concern over the Seahawks interviewing witnesses when the PROSECUTOR did that, and the Seahawks then got an endorsement from her?
......
.
Supposing Clark didn't have the DV charge. Where would he have gone in the draft? What range? Unless or until I find out that he's a batterer, I'm psyched that the Seahawks might have had a pass rusher fall to them.
Respectfully,
Jeff