I know Ryan will complain that this entry is too long, but deal with it (you know who you are):
With all the discussions about whether Brett Favre will be fined or suspended under the personal conduct policy of the NFL for the alleged pictures, texts, and voicemails he sent, I have received several questions about what exactly is the personal conduct policy and who does it cover. The Personal Conduct Policy as adopted by the NFL is somewhat long and detailed, so I will provide a quick version:
The purpose of the policy is to punish those who engage in violent or criminal behavior detrimental to the integrity of the league. Not only are players under contract covered by the policy, but so are NFL and team employees, drafted but unsigned rookies, and unsigned free agents. Any player charged or accused of such behavior will be required to have a consultation with the commissioner. Any person convicted of a crime or that pleads guilty or nolo contendere is subject to discipline under the policy, which can include a fine, suspension, or banishment from the league. There is also a section in the policy that applies to criminal or threatening activity in the workplace, and violators may be subject to mandatory counseling or even be terminated. The one comical aspect of the policy is that any appeals must go through the commissioner, who would have to overrule himself to reduce a punishment. This seems a little one-sided with no checks and balances, so look for the player’s union to address this issue in the near future.
So the question becomes, how is the alleged Brett Favre incident covered under the policy? Sending inappropriate texts and pictures, while maybe immoral or unethical, is not criminal or violent behavior, so how can Favre be punished? The answer is very simple. Since the commissioner created the policy and is responsible for enforcing it, he can simply apply the policy to whatever he sees fit. This is a very embarrassing incident for the NFL, and you better believe Commissioner Goodell will punish Favre if he believes he has enough evidence that the alleged incidents occurred as reported. Now, if you are thinking “How is the player’s union accepting the commissioner having all of this unilateral power,” they are not, and this will likely be one of the heavily debated topics once the collective bargaining discussions begin.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Friday, October 22, 2010
O.J. Staying in Jail
O.J. Simpson's appeal stemming from his conviction of robbery and kidnapping was denied by the Nevada Supreme Court today. Simpson'a attorneys argued that the racial makeup of the jury and the conduct of the judge were key issues in the case, and the conviction was prejudicial payback for his acquittal involving the 1994 slayings of Simpson's ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman. Simpson will continue to serve his 9-33 year sentence in Nevada State Prison. Meanwhile, the conviction of Simpson's co-defendant, Clarence Stewart, was reversed, and he will face a new trial.
BCS Going to Court?
In an interview with the ABC affiliate in Salt Lake City, the Utah Attorney General, Mark Shurtleff says there is an 80% chance the state of Utah will file a lawsuit against the BCS. Shurtleff claims the lawsuit has already been written, and he will visit with a top anti-trust offical with the Department of Justice when he is Washington D.C. in just a few days. Shurtleff claims the BCS is an illegal monopoly and contains illegal price fixing, and will try to get the Department of Justice to join him in the suit, although, he states he is willing to pursue this action alone.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Several MLB Players to Testify Against Bonds
Today, federal prosecutors submitted a list of witnesses that intend to testify in the trial against Barry Bonds, and several MLB and former MLB players were on the list. Bonds case has been delayed several times now as the prosecutors have had trouble obtaining admissible evidence. Prosecutors were attempting to appeal a judge's ruling barring evidence of a urine test demonstrating steroid use. The slugger's trial is currently scheduled for March 21 in San Francisco.
Among the prople scheduled to testify against Bonds are current Rockies first baseman and admitted steroids user Jason Giambi, and former MLB players Armando Rios, Benito Santiago, and Giambi's brother Jeremy, among other. Bonds former girlfriend, Kimberly Bell, will also be called to tesify against him, in addition to Bond's former personal trainer.
Bond's team intends to call a former San Francisco Giants trainer, who is now MLB's Director of Umpire Medical Services, as well as an independent steroid expert on his behalf.
It seems as though the prosecution is trying to do all it can to convict Bonds, but unfortunately for them, witness testimony is about all the evidence they have left. While experts say it is unlikely Bonds will be convicted, many believe prosecutors are still going to go through with the entire trial in an effort to prepare for the upcoming Roger Clemens case. It seems the federal government has a much stronger case against Clemens at this point, given that much of the evidence against Bonds has been deemed inadmissible.
Among the prople scheduled to testify against Bonds are current Rockies first baseman and admitted steroids user Jason Giambi, and former MLB players Armando Rios, Benito Santiago, and Giambi's brother Jeremy, among other. Bonds former girlfriend, Kimberly Bell, will also be called to tesify against him, in addition to Bond's former personal trainer.
Bond's team intends to call a former San Francisco Giants trainer, who is now MLB's Director of Umpire Medical Services, as well as an independent steroid expert on his behalf.
It seems as though the prosecution is trying to do all it can to convict Bonds, but unfortunately for them, witness testimony is about all the evidence they have left. While experts say it is unlikely Bonds will be convicted, many believe prosecutors are still going to go through with the entire trial in an effort to prepare for the upcoming Roger Clemens case. It seems the federal government has a much stronger case against Clemens at this point, given that much of the evidence against Bonds has been deemed inadmissible.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)