Frank Clark: "The woman took it to another level"
When asked about the November domestic violence incident, Frank Clark appeared to blame the woman:
Clark: "The woman involved took it to another level. It all could have been avoided." He said it was a "shock" when he invited to Combine
— Dane Brugler (@dpbrugler) February 20, 2015
That just sounds horrible.
Mod edit: This is the full quote from this MLive story. There are more words from Clark in the story and I'd encourage everyone to take a look before forming a strong opinion on what he said today. JGB.
I'm just saying it was a conversation between me and one my friends, and the woman involved, she took it to another level that it shouldn't have been taken to. "That's fine. I'm not throwing her under the bus. I'm not saying she did anything wrong. I'm just saying a lot of things that happened in that room that night could have been avoided."
February 20th, 2015 at 12:25 PM ^
kind of see and hear it heading in somewhat of a scary direction, as the backlash to the "crack down" on guns has been much more significant than the alleged crack down itself, and now I feel the standard rhetoric in so pro-gun that what is permissible and acceptable is being somewhat misconstrued.
That is digression, however, and I did not mean to make it about guns. I am not an "anti-gun nut" ever though my original post may have come across like that.
February 20th, 2015 at 3:39 PM ^
for self-defense or the defense of others. it doesn't have to be a perfect 1-for-1 response, but may not be disproportionate. you can be wrong, but it must be reasonable that under the circumstances that existed at the time. you may only use deadly force if you reasonably believe you or someone you defending is in danger of great bodily harm and/or death.
in other words 'yes', you can hit a woman, but you better have a real good reason to believe an imminent or actual battery against you or someone else is about to occur and if you're 6'3" 265, you can't put a beat down on a 5' 6" 150 lb gal. you can shove her, you can certainly disarm her if that is an issue, you can even probably give a good punch if its really that type of an assault, but you can't do more than that. also, an aggressor is not allowed to claim self defense in most circumstances.
February 20th, 2015 at 4:06 PM ^
can absolutely claim self-defense if the response is disproportionate to the original aggression. Man 1 with gun catches other man 2 kissing up on his gal, Man 1 punches man 2, in anger. Man 2 breaks out a knife and charges man 1, intending to stab him. Man 1 pulls out gun and shoots man 2.
I think, in a situation where the escalation is that distinct, that a claim of self-defense would hold up or at least be viable.
February 20th, 2015 at 6:50 PM ^
'in most circumstances'.
February 20th, 2015 at 10:12 PM ^
violence/potential harm. At that point, the aggressor can respond in self-defense.
It's more clear than you make it sound.
I upvoted you until I read the last sentence, but when I tried to go neutral, it turned into a down vote, so fuck it, I agree with most of your post and changed it back.
February 20th, 2015 at 10:21 PM ^
to withdraw from combat and announce his/her intention to do so before they are then allowed the right of self defense, and there is some time for the victim to react to that - its not like a game of tag where you wack someone and say 'i'm done!', and walk away unscathed.
February 20th, 2015 at 10:51 PM ^
but that doesn't really translate to "in most cases the aggressor can't claim self-defense." You've just laid out a specific requirement for claiming it.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:26 PM ^
are extraordinarily rare in my experience.
February 21st, 2015 at 3:56 AM ^
That may be (although that may be anecdotal - and in certain jurisdictions these scenarios may be much more likely (any jurisdiction where the attacked is more likely to be armed and to, therefore, escalate the situation to another level of force)
but the way you initially put it - and this is splitting hairs - I interpreted it to mean that the aggressor couldnt claim self-defense in the bulk of hypothetical circumstances (your use of the word "circumstances" was confusing here), when, as we both seem to know, there is a clear set of contemplated scenarios in which tort law allows the aggressor the privilege of self-defense. Again, it's splitting hairs, but something like "in reality, most of the time the aggressor will not be able to claim self-defense" would have read differently to my ear - ymmv.
February 20th, 2015 at 12:09 PM ^
threw a full 1/2 gallon orange juice container across the room and hit me in the back of the head during an arguement and it spilled all over the floor. My response...."Are you crazy, do you know how much OJ costs!!!"
February 20th, 2015 at 12:11 PM ^
was Simply Orange you may have been able to use physical force in that situation.
February 20th, 2015 at 12:46 PM ^
Depends whether it was half full or half empty.
February 20th, 2015 at 1:28 PM ^
Is okay. The real stuff is Whole Foods fresh squeezed. That stuff is liquid gold. That is just about the only thing I buy there, but man is it great. Think Simply Orange is expensive? WF's is $7.99/half gallon. Ouch.
February 20th, 2015 at 12:47 PM ^
Was it high pulp?
February 20th, 2015 at 4:54 PM ^
This. If a woman swings at me more than a few times unreasonably, she better get ready to be knocked the fuck out.
Anyone remember 8 ball jacket guy who was getting bullied and hit in the head with heels by a chick on the train? He's a hero for all men everywhere.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2828805/Shocking-moment-female-…
February 20th, 2015 at 10:17 PM ^
charged, and rightfully so. Those girls were an obvious menace.
The report of the incident sure sounds like he defended himself and didn't stop there. You have the right to do the former, but not the latter.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:38 AM ^
February 20th, 2015 at 11:53 AM ^
While I completely agree with you, everytime someone says that I reflexively think of the following Bill Burr bit.
February 20th, 2015 at 1:30 PM ^
I love his bit on all the people who got in trouble for being racist or anti gay. Everyone acts as if they are SO offended and surprised that they said those things. What did you think an old man sitting in a swamp with a gun covered in camo with a beard down to his dick was gonna say about gay people. Did you think he was gonna have some progressive ideas. Give me a break.
February 20th, 2015 at 4:47 PM ^
Tosh clip, Burr clip, Tosh clip, Burr clip. There is a symmetry to this thread that I like.
Great minds …..
February 20th, 2015 at 11:24 AM ^
a reasonable and not at all heated discussion will take place in this thread.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:25 AM ^
February 20th, 2015 at 11:27 AM ^
These answers are going to cost him in the draft. NFL teams are not going hunting for the next Ray Rice. At least not in the first six rounds. He might as well have said "B*tch deserved it"--what he actually said damned him just as much.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:29 AM ^
Undrafted free agency here he comes.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:46 AM ^
So, the same thing that was going to happen already.
February 20th, 2015 at 12:16 PM ^
Not if he had handled the interviews well.
Dude is an athletic freak who showed flashes of enormous potential during his time in AA. There's a reason he was invited to the Combine. They don't give those invitations out to everybody (see Gardner, Devin).
February 20th, 2015 at 12:23 PM ^
He's an above average athlete who didn't do much to stand out on the football field. They invite 100 more participants than people who get drafted into the NFL.
February 20th, 2015 at 12:28 PM ^
He was our best defensive lineman, and we had a good defense last year.
I don't think he would have been drafted after the incident no matter what he said, but before that he probably would have been a late round pick.
February 20th, 2015 at 1:58 PM ^
I'm sorry, but Frank Clark was much better than an "above average athlete." I had no doubts about him getting drafted until that incident. He seemed to me to be another player that underperformed his skills, much like Funchess.
I wouldn't have been surprised to see him snagged in the third round prior to what happened, and I fully expect him still to be grabbed by someone, undrafted or not, and make an NFL roster if he can stay out of trouble. Not just make the roster, but play some significant minutes in his career. He has plenty of "can't teach" immeasureables that will do him a lot of good with proper discipline and coaching.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:29 AM ^
I have a hard time believing that a man as big adn athletic as Frank Clark couldn't easily have removed himself from the situation with minimal damage to himself, unless she had a knife or gun. Even if she started it all. I'll let the justice system work it out, but based on the reported eye-witness accounts, it looks very bad for Frank.
February 20th, 2015 at 3:12 PM ^
an alarm clock at him. Should she have done that? Hell no. I don't support domestic violence in any way. Personally, I think they may both need counseling. Next time they have a disagreement, maybe they will be smart enough to resolve things without children as their witnesses. I feel worse for them.
(This comment comes from a petite female who is willing to let the justice system do its thing)
February 20th, 2015 at 11:29 AM ^
prior to the eviseration of this thread.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:47 AM ^
this is just stupid and bad judgment. If he had spent the last and upcoming months showing remorse and taking steps to demonstrate he will behave appropriately going forward, someone may have given him a second chance. Teams inclined to do that are now crossing him off the list as "just not worth the backlash"
Edit: not meant to respond to the above post, just general comment
February 20th, 2015 at 12:48 PM ^
I don't know man... there's not a lot of outright black-balled players in the NFL. Maurice Clarrett got a few chances. Mike Vick came back. Everyone knew Johnny Football had red flags coming out of college and he still got drafted. Same with Randy Moss. Furthermore, AP and Ray Rice will be playing somewhere next year.
It seems like everyone in the NFL says the right things when cameras and microphones are in their faces but behind closed doors, if a player can help a team win, GMs are talking about those players.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:35 AM ^
February 20th, 2015 at 11:40 AM ^
February 20th, 2015 at 11:36 AM ^
no words.
some people just dont get "it."
taking all of the responsibility and profusely apologizing should have been the ONLY strategy.
amazing stupidity.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:36 AM ^
with exteme prejudice.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:37 AM ^
Did he not think he was going to be asked about his incident? How is this the answer he came up with?
February 20th, 2015 at 11:38 AM ^
really think he..... thinks, at least not like you think he does.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:38 AM ^
I feel like maybe he could have answered this question better. Whatever the question was.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:41 AM ^
Out of context this sounds bad. What does "take it to another level" mean? I don't remember the specifics of the incident. She yelled at me louder is different than she tried to stab me with a knife.
February 20th, 2015 at 11:45 AM ^
February 20th, 2015 at 11:46 AM ^
February 20th, 2015 at 11:59 AM ^
for Clark
February 20th, 2015 at 11:59 AM ^