An intense reaction has been triggered by Monday's news of a six-game suspension for Cleveland Browns quarterback DeshaunWatson. The issue of how the NFL polices players when it comes to behavior toward women is being dealt with by the allegations of sexual misconduct against him. A lot of the reaction on Monday seemed to be related to the fact that the league has mishandled that in the past. They were disappointed by the outcome.
It's not designed to make everyone happy. The decisions should be based on evidence and precedent. You can see from the report that Sue L. Robinson tried to maintain that balance.
How did she get on six games? What must be done for the future massage therapy sessions? The report contains a number of key findings.
By engaging in sexual assault, by engaging in conduct that poses a genuine danger to the safety and well-being of another person, and by engaging in conduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity of the NFL were all found guilty by Robinson.
The collective bargaining agreement states that the decision of the discipline officer as to whether or not he violated the policy is binding. The league wouldn't have been allowed to appeal if she had found no violation.
The league has the right to appeal the determination of discipline, with the commissioner or his designate serving as the appeals officer. Any response to the appeal must be filed in writing within two business days of the Disciplinary Officer's decision. The amount of discipline, if any, should be modified according to the evidence below.
When the commissioner still gets final say on discipline, the league has to prove its case under the new procedures. In this case, it is necessary to rely on "credible evidence" in front of a retired federal judge.
There was a time when the findings of the investigators would be made public, but now that is not the case.
Robinson states on Page 3 of her report that the case presented to her was not about 24 different women but four. The NFL interviewed 12 of the 24 women who were sued for damages in civil court and lied for its conclusions on the testimony of 4 therapists as well as interviews of 37 other third parties.
All 24 of the women can't be subpoenaed to talk to the investigators. The basis of their argument was based on interviews with 12 people. It's not clear why they used only four, but that's what they decided was the best way to tell their story.
Robinson found the details of the behavior to be disturbing, from the way he asked for the massages to the way he tried to cover himself during them.
No one who reads this report will think Robinson found someone not guilty of something. Robinson concludes that there was a sexual purpose to the arrangements made with the therapists. Based on what she found to be the league's definition of sexual assault, Robinson foundWatson guilty of violating the personal conduct policy by engaging in sexual assault
Tom Brady's deflation of the game balls used in the AFC Championship Game in January 2015 and the New Orleans Saints' 'Pay-for Performance' scheme are past cases in which Robinson cites.
Robinson found credible the NFL's evidence that his actions were detrimental to the league because he identified himself as an NFL player.
NFL players and GMs reacted to the Deshaun Watson suspension.
Robinson wants to know if the league's proposed discipline was justified after finding Watson guilty of violating the league's Personal Conduct Policy. It was proposed that he not be allowed to return until he satisfied certain conditions. Robinson is tasked with reviewing that proposal for consistency of treatment, uniformity of standards for parties similarly situated, and patent unfairness or selectivity
If you're wondering why the league only imposed a six-game suspension, the answer is that it did not. The league wanted him to be suspended for one year for his conduct.
Robinson explained why she believed that was unjust in the final pages of her report. The rule of law depends on the definition of prohibited conduct.
The case of former Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice has been cited by Robinson, who notes that the league's characterization of what happened was that Rice was suspended for two games and only after public outcry changed his behavior.
She states that this policy change, even though it was a response to public outrage, gave fair notice to its players and to the public of the probable consequences of certain violent conduct.
Criminal assault or battery, domestic violence, dating violence, child abuse and other forms of family violence are all included in the six-game suspension for violating the personal conduct policy after Rice. Robinson states on Page 13 that Mr.Watson's conduct doesn't fall into the category of violent conduct that would require a minimum 6-game suspension.
She states that prior cases of sexual assault did not lead to six-game suspensions but only three-game suspensions. Robinson didn't start from the six-game baseline in the personal conduct policy because she didn't think it met the requirements for a six-game suspension.
There is an interesting passage on the page. The NFL argued thatconsistency is not possible because there are no similar players. Robinson writes that the NFL is not just equating violent conduct with non-violent conduct but has elevated the importance of the latter without any evidence. I don't think it's appropriate for the league to discipline players for non-violent sexual conduct without notice of the dramatic change that's happening.
Robinson is saying the same thing as you want to argue that this behavior deserves a harsher penalty. Perhaps you're correct. It's not in your policy and you can't just make policy to support one particular case. Everyone would know that the league should adjust its policy to account for the type of behavior that is found guilty of if it wants to do so.
It's an interesting argument, but it answers a lot of the questions about the length of the suspension. She goes on to say that it is unjust to change the penalties for conduct after the fact.
Robinson decided she wouldn't start from a six-game baseline but from one of three games or fewer, based on precedent set by other sexual assault cases. She says that the reason to increase the suspension is due to the lack of expressed remorse and tardy notice to the NFL of the first-filed lawsuit. She says that he is a first-time offenders and had an excellent reputation in his community before these events. He paid back the money.
She notes that the league could have placed him on the commissioner's exempt list last year and chose not to, which she thinks means the league didn't consider his behavior deserving of such punishment until it saw the public reaction to it. She makes it clear in her conclusion that the NFL is not a forward looking organization. The NFL responded to violent conduct after a public outcry, so it seems the league is responding to another public outcry about Mr.
Robinson writes that she settled on six games because it is the largest suspension ever imposed for non-violent sexual conduct, but that it is more egregious than previous suspensions for non-violent sexual conduct.
Ryan Clark explains how Deshaun's six-game suspension stacks up to other players in the league.
The idea that the league has not punished team owners for similar offenses is one of the arguments made by the NFLPA during the hearing. Robinson notes that the personal conduct policy argument is applicable to both team owners and management. The argument that she should consider the lighter punishment given to team owners as part of the precedent carried some weight.
Robinson states that after his suspension is over, he must limit his massage therapy to Club-approved massage therapists for the duration of his career. The league has the right to re-impose the suspension if he is caught going outside of his team's purview for massage again.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
