Some of you have asked why free-agent receiver Plaxico Burress is facing a suspension prior to the completion of his pending criminal case while Packers defensive tackle Johnny Jolly continues to be available to play despite felony drug charges on which he was due to stand trial on Friday.
The charges were dismissed, but they’ll be filed again. Which means that Jolly apparently will be permitted to continue to play until he is convicted or pleads guilty.
So why does the league office seem to be poised to suspend Burress but at the same time is contemplating no action against Jolly?
The distinction possibly arises from the inherent differences between the two policies that apply in this case. Burress would be suspended under the Personal Conduct Policy, which takes into account the possibility of a pre-adjudication suspension. The portion of the substance abuse policy regarding punishment for criminal drug offenses arguably applies only after the case is resolved.
The practical reality, in our opinion, is that the evidence of guilt in the Burress case is much stronger than in Jolly’s situation. If Jolly had been carrying a bottle of “purple drank” in the waistband of his sweatpants, for example, the case against him would be stronger; as it stands, he was merely driving a car in which the concoction of soda and codeine-laced cough syrup was found -- and in which three other persons were riding.
So, basically, the league treats each case based on its own facts and circumstances, and the league reserves the right to take action prior to the conclusion of a given criminal case whenever the league deems such action appropriate.
Though this approach might entail at times a spraining of the letter of the law, the fact that the union has given the Commissioner the power to serve as judge, jury, executioner, appeals court, and last-minute-pardon-giving governor means that the league can pretty much do whatever it wants.
