Mark doesn't need luck, he needs serious help. I'm struggling to recall a CTE situation that ended well.
Mark Rypien arrested...
- Thread starter 79COUG
- Start date
Careful, he might come to your house and "tie your hose in a knot"...
I'm not backpedaling.
There is a difference between generic 4th degree assault, and 4th degree assault domestic violence.
Your absolutly right in what you said about generic 4th degree assault.
But that dont apply to the different domestic violence charge that Mark was charged with.
Also I made a mistake mispoke. I accidentally forgot about domestic violence charge, accidentally said generic 4th degree assault, when I wrongly applied definition to that charge.
I meant Domestic violence charge, and meant my definition to apply to domestic violence charge.
That is a mistake, that was made and not a backpedal, walkback.
What I mean is:
A. If Mark hit his wife, without extenuating circumstances, then I would want Mark to be convicted, sentenced.
B.If Mark hit his wife, but had extenuating circumstances, then I would want Mark to be found not guilty, not be sentenced, and to get help, and would think that to be sad, would hope for the best for him, and his wife.
But the thing is, we dont know what the situation is.
It would be wrong to want, say B if Mark did A.
It would be wrong to want say A, if Mark did B.
We dont know whether it is A or B or what situation is.
So because of that, it is wrong to say it is A or B.
Thats what it means to be NEUTRAL, OBJECTIVE, GUARDED.
Its wrong to say A or B until we know whether A or B, know situation, whether Mark is a Coug or Not.
Coug Fans say B when they dont know its B, because Mark is a coug. Thats not ok.
And if Mark was a husky, they would say A, when they dont know its A, that is also not ok.
It doesnt matter whether Mark is a coug or husky on about this:
In that if Mark did this without extenuating circumstances, A., he should be convicted, sentenced, no matter whether or not he is a coug or husky.
And if Mark had, has extenuating circumstances,B., then he should not be convicted, sentenced, and should get help, etc, no matter whether a coug or husky
And since we dont know whether A or B on, about Mark, then should be NEUTRAL, OBJECTIVE, GUARDED, No matter whether or not he is either a coug or husky.
Just imagine, lets say we wish Mark the best, and then lets say it ends up A. We would be wishing a wife beater without extenuating circumstances well.
That would not be appropiate.
And opposite that. Lets say in a effort to not make excuses for a coug, we hope that Mark gets convicted, sentenced A.
And then lets say after that, we find out that Mark had extenuating circumstances B.
That would not be ok for us to think A. If he was B.
Thats why its important to be NEUTRAL, OBJECTIVE, GUARDED, until we know what is going on whether its a A or whether its B, whether Mark is a coug or husky
In other words its not ok to be innappropiatly biased in this kind of situation.
Last edited:
Agree 100%...very sad situation. Not sure the importance of degree of assault he faces. Or
Mik
1) I never played church league and if I did and a team scored 120 points I would have stepped off the court and never played again.
2) my father never coached as he traveled all the time
3) my high school coach actually wanted me to play because I was athletic
4) Despite my job I played hoops in to my 50’s
Oh wrong thread .
On a serious note what difference does it make what the degree of the charge. I am totally ok assuming he did it, that where there is smoke there is fire.
I make the assumption because this behavior is very common among those who have suffered from head injuries . This is exactly the behavior that Tony Dorsett has exhibited. It is exactly what has been described by Gale Sayers family, and the behavior that Fred McNeil from the Vikings exhibited before his death.
So I have no doubt something happened: what is more problematic is the right punishment and treatment .
Last edited:
By Washington State law, the ONLY difference between 4th Degree Assault and 4th Degree Assault Domestic Violence is that the attempted battery is against a family member. PERIOD.
I'm just going to say that you are expending way too much effort on this. There are a lot of reasons to believe that there are CTE issues at play on this and that needs to be part of the discussion on how to proceed. You are way too focused on the actions instead of the causes. Putting Rypien in prison if the event was caused by CTE isn't going to make him a more productive part of society when he gets out. Yes, we need to wait before jumping to conclusions, but wasting time on if/then charts isn't something most of us want to do.
Well....not exactly. By definition, it does not have to be a true family member, it also includes "household members". That includes any adults "who are presently residing together or who have resided together in the past." Also former spouses, former dating partners, and anyone you've had a child with, etc.
Good Lord man. You've made your point. Probably a dozen times. You want everyone to remain neutral, guarded and reserved. Got it. Can you give it a rest now? You've sufficiently derailed the thread.
Yo Fair and Balanced ... I am not “biased”. I think he did exactly what the witness saw . Now comes the tough part... what should the punishment be?
And btw I think what Ryoien or any other hell that a football player goes through with all these concussion is the perfect definition of extenuating circumstances.
Close enough, both of you. Let's agree - the whole DV designation is to protect battered wives. I got no problem with that. GREAT intentions.
But damn, a DV conviction means you can't own a gun in Washington. What if you come home and catch your cheating wife in bed with some f-head and he escapes out the window and she starts laughing at you and you just crack and backhand her. Once.
You are a labeled a wife beater for the rest of your life, and can never go hunting or have a weapon for self defense the rest of your life. Ever. Is that justice?
Or, you get in an argument with your former girlfriend and she says you hit her and the court takes her word for it over yours. Same result.
In the first case, your defense is based on heat of the moment, ‘crime of passion’, and you quickly regained composure. Probably better file for divorce immediately, claiming infidelity. By the letter of the law you’re guilty, but you’ve got a decent chance of getting a plea that drops the DV. Or of convincing a juror you were justified, and getting off scot free.
In the second case, not too many prosecutors are going to pursue a straight he-said-she-said with zero evidence.
So sure, in theory your scenarios are plausible. In reality...probably not.
On the backhand a cheating wife comment.....you just made the argument for why people convicted for domestic violence shouldn't be allowed to have a firearm. If you lost your cool enough to backhand her.....even only once, what's to say that the next time won't be a shotgun blast to the chest....but only one time? Any dude who can't control himself and keep from smacking his wife, cheating or not, really needs to take a step back and re-evaluate themselves. I will say that I agree that a lifetime ban is extreme, but thousands of women have died or been severely harmed by guys who claimed that their loss of control was a one time thing.
I've been married for 22 years and I've had a couple pretty intense "discussions" with the wife, but I've never hit her.
