I see it coming. As the NFL formulates a policy on domestic abuse they’re holding back on punishment on one player (soon, I bet, to be many) under the guise of due process. If a player hasn’t been convicted of a crime yet, how can we punish him, they argue. No matter if he’s admitted it or if the incident is caught on tape so he can’t deny it.
Sounds to me like a nifty way to keep income-producing team members on the field. What’s so cleaver about this stance is that abused women often drop the charges or never file them to begin with, believing that their abuser is contrite and will never do it again. Also, these guys are making a ton of money when they play. How hard would it be to convince a vulnerable woman not to file a complaint, pointing out that there would be far less money for her and the children if he were banned from the game? Would she be willing to chance her children’s future, or would she figure that she could tough it out and have some security for them and herself in a divorce settlement if it happened again?
If a complaint is never filed, or if the victim is a witness for the defense, how many convictions will there be? And, without a conviction, the NFL could slap the player on the wrist and send him out to play as if nothing ever happened.
I’ll be watching the policy-formation process closely, hoping that the NFL will learn that abuse of another human being really is at least as important as the game-affecting drug offenses that they do punish.