Send all feedback to dotnetjason@gmail.com

Regarding your March 3 blog entry, I want to thank you for pointing out the inconsistency between the way the law treats brain damaged people who commit violent acts and the way Chris Benoit has been treated by the wrestling industry and the fans he gave his life to.

People who knew Benoit personally—some for all or most of his life—said from the very beginning the man they knew couldn't have done such a thing. And now the scientific evidence has been vetted and shown to prove "with a reasonable degree of medical certainty" (strong legal words) he didn't.

A brain damaged individual unable to reason and rationally act as Benoit once would have did. Had he lived to suffer punishment for his crimes, criminal law would have recognized that mitigating factor and been a wiser, fairer judge of him than the wrestling community has been.

It makes me ashamed to be part of a community so devoid of compassion, and so intent on vindictiveness. So thank you for uttering phrases like "made me feel sad." That's the exact emotion it should evoke from everyone who hears the story.

Paul Ormsby

Powell replies: I think it’s natural to feel many emotions regarding Benoit, including anger, because there’s no way of knowing with absolute certainty what triggered his actions. The medical study raises the possibility that brain damage was a factor, but it's not 100 percent conclusive. That Benoit’s friends were surprised by his actions is not a surprise and doesn’t prove the brain damage theory.

There was an old skit on “Saturday Night Live” years ago when Buckwheat (played by Eddie Murphy) was shot and killed. The next week, they ran another skit in which they interviewed friends and family of shooter. They all had positive things to say about the shooter and talked about what wonderful person he was. Each time, the reporter would conclude the interview by asking if that meant they were surprised that this seemingly wonderful person shot Buckwheat. Each person responded by saying something like: “No, I’m not surprised at all. He talked about it all the time.”

The reason the skit was so hilarious is because you rarely hear friends of a killer say they saw it coming. Certainly there are cases in which a killer showed signs of mental illness, but many times a killer’s closest friends and family members are shocked because they were never exposed to that side of the killer’s personality.

You could go also argue that any person who murders another human being must be suffering from some form of mental illness. People refer to serial killers as “sick” and “twisted” all the time. They clearly have mental issues, but I don’t think very many people are lining up to defend them and ask that they be remembered differently because they suffer from mental illness. Most people simply want these killers to be punished for their actions.

It’s a complicated subject and I’m not trying to take back anything I wrote as much as I’m trying to illustrate that is more than one way to look at this subject. It’s not as simple as labeling him a monster, nor has it been 100 percent proven that brain damage led him to commit these horrible acts. As such, I don’t think you can blame people for being angry with Benoit, but I also hope they take a second to at least consider the possibility that brain damage could have been a factor.

***

I totally disagree with everyone who trashes the Big Show and Floyd Mayweather segment that aired on Monday’s Raw. I got the impression that WWE has no control over what Mayweather will say or do. He's not trying to play the face (which he never has in boxing either) and there's an element of chaos every time he's on screen.

I like the dynamic and find it much more interesting than Mike Tyson or Lawrence Taylor coming in and following cookie cutter WWE scripts. I'm looking forward to this match a lot more after Monday night.

Rob Sklarz
 
Powell replies: I think you’re in the minority on this one, Rob. I don’t mind that they’re letting his real personality (or at least his boxing persona) come out. The problem I had with the segment is that Show and Mayweather talked over each other, which made it hard to follow.

Mayweather’s antics have been strange and unusual, and not in a way that makes you want to tune in to see what he’s going to do next. He doesn’t stay focussed on selling anything in particular and just sort of goes off on peculiar tangents that don’t feature a memorable line or some type of hook that WWE can focus on or use for sound byte material.

The closest he came to saying anything like that was when he said that he broke Show’s nose and would break his jaw next time. Otherwise, there was nothing that really stood out among his comments. I think viewers are more confused by his antics than anything, and I believe he and WWE need to change their approach on Monday.

***

I had to read your story about Jonathan Coachman being punished for not running away from the announcers’ table a few times so I wouldn't think I was hallucinating. I understand why they felt the need to punish him, although I don't agree with it.

My problem is with the method of punishment. Finishing moves from some of the top guys? Seriously? Did they give him a Purple Nurple, too? A Wet Willy? How about a Swirlie? Or are they saving those up for a more egregious infraction?

If I were Coach, I would have asked Undertaker to put his new finishing...thing ( I refuse to call that a hold) on me. At least then you know you're not going to get hurt because that thing shows more light than a sunroof.

Frank Hyden

Powell replies: First, I want to remind you that the original source for that news item was the Wrestling Observer Newsletter. As I mentioned in the original POV, I don’t think this was something Coach was forced to do. In other words, I don’t think he was dragged kicking and screaming to the ring. If that were the case, I’d have a huge problem with it. I’m assuming he went along with this punishment, much like NFL rookies go along with most of the hazing they receive from veterans.

The locker rooms in professional sports are a different world compared to a typical office setting. Can you imagine how your boss would react if you taped a coworker to his chair and poured cold water on him (veteran football players tape rookies to the goal posts during training camp and douse them with cold water and/or gatorade)? You’d probably be fired, but I’ve seen various clips on NFL shows where it’s an acceptable form of behavior and 99 percent of the rookies involved look like they’re laughing and having fun.

I’m not condoning all the antics that takes place in locker rooms, but I can tell you that there have been times over the years when I wished I could spear the hell out the top PC guy who know every little detail of the employee handbook. Every office has one. These people can’t wait to report anyone who violates a rule so petty that even the superior rolls his/her eyes at it, yet the company’s management handbook leaves them with no choice but to punish the offender.

Come on, Frank, admit it. You’ve wanted to Tombstone at least one coworker in your life. Well, unless you’re that ultra-PC guy in your office in which case you’re probably really offended by everything I’ve written, but I doubt it. You’d never act on the impulse, but I’ll bet deep down you think the little weasel coworker would probably stop being so anal if someone smacked him upside the head with a Shillelagh.

Heck, it would probably do him some good in the long run and help him fit in better with the rest of society. He might even develop a social life and get out of the house once in a while instead of spending every Saturday night alone watching German fetish porn, eating Cheetos, and crying himself to sleep because he hates himself so much. I should probably just shut up now.

RECOMMEND THIS ARTICLE: