In the statement announcing Hardy’s 10-game suspension, the NFL simply said that the “decision is based on findings that are supported by credible corroborating evidence independent of Ms. Holder’s statements and testimony, such as testimony of other witnesses, medical and police reports, expert analyses, and photographs.” But under what standard is the evidence deemed to be credible, especially with Nicole Holder not cooperating due to the settlement she received?
The idea that the NFL can simply decide what happened without any clear test of the evidence is a potential problem for other players — especially for players who didn’t do what they’re accused of doing. A subjective belief by a prosecutor-turned-league-employee that “credible corroborating evidence” exists isn’t enough. Every prosecutor who brings charges against a defendant believes that “credible corroborating evidence” exists; the challenge becomes finding a fair and objective way to determine whether the evidence really is credible.
2. Does Hardy’s punishment mesh with the league’s pre-Ray Rice policies?
But Hardy’s behavior happened before any of those changes were made. Setting aside what he did (assuming that he is indeed guilty), Hardy is entitled to be treated the way he would have been treated under the NFL’s existing approach to domestic violence at the time the behavior occurred. That’s a basic notion of fairness that applies in many settings, to the benefit of everyone.
Rules can’t be changed after the fact to apply looking backward to things that already have happened. Otherwise, folks can get away with making up the rules as they go. Which is what many have repeatedly accused the NFL of doing over the past several months.
3. Why don’t players get credit for time served?
Though paid for the games that happened before the charges are resolved, players primarily want to play football — a reality NFL executive V.P. of football operations Troy Vincent conceded in a conversation last year with Peterson.
“You were away from the game,” Vincent told Peterson. “You were not participating, even though it was a paid leave. You were not participating. And ballplayers know their shelf life.”
Why not give the player credit for the games missed during paid leave, and then impose a fine reflecting the number of games he ultimately was suspended after the case was resolved? Hardy, for example, missed 15 games in 2014 with pay. If the final punishment is 10 games, the NFL should fine him the equivalent of 10 of the game checks he received.
Instead, the league believes Hardy should miss 25 games for behavior that previously would have resulted in a two-game suspension. And even though the NFL has since realized that a two-game suspension isn’t enough in situations of this nature, the standard penalty at the time of Hardy’s incident was two games.
Mike Florio raises important questions. It's not a case to absolve Hardy of any blame, he however deftly touches on, without mention, the Commissioner's abuse of power and inconsistent adherence to the NFL's own rules.
That's right. The officer involved has been charged with criminal homicide. However, because of the races of the parties involved, you might not have heard of it. Officer is a white female and victim is a white male. She shot him twice in the back as he lay face down. #cold.
HARRISBURG, Pa. - The video from the camera attached to the officer's stun gun shows how David Kassick died, authorities say: two bullets, four seconds apart, fired into his back as he lay face down.
Unlike the video in the South Carolina case, which has itself resulted in a murder charge, the footage recorded by Hummelstown police Officer Lisa Mearkle's stun gun has not been released. Attorneys for the officer want to keep it that way: they asked a judge on Friday to bar the prosecution from releasing it.