STALLWORTH'S INCIDENT A REMINDER OF THE PAST

DUI Manslaughter. This is what Dante Stallworth is being charged with after he struck and killed a pedestrian crossing the street in Miami, Florida. Stallworth's attorney, Christopher Lyons, has stated that he will "vigorously" defend the case. As an attorney myself, I applaud Mr. Lyons' intentions, however, Stallworth doesn't have much of a defense.

For one, Stallworth's blood alcohol level of 0.12 has been officially confirmed by Miami police. And secondly, but just as important in a DUI manslaughter case, a death was a direct result of Stallworth's poor choice in driving under the influence of alcohol.

The defense will surely argue that the deceased pedestrian in this case attempted to illegally cross the street in some way, but in front of a jury, this defense will most certainly not be enough in a criminal case.

I suspect that Stallworth and his team of attorneys will try as hard as possible to enter into a plea deal, but prosecutors in Florida will be hard pressed to do so seeing that this case has already drawn a frenzy of media attention. If the Miami District Attorneys Office offers a plea deal to high profile NFL player, it will give the impression that money and status can keep anyone out of prison. The bottom line is, a human being was killed because of Stallworth's actions.

There's also the question of whether or not Stallworth will be allowed back in the NFL again. If Stallworth should be convicted of this crime, would Roger Goodell ban him for life? Maybe. But this isn't the first time we've seen something like this.

Remember Leonard Little? He was drafted in the 3rd round by the St. Louis Rams in 1998 and signed a three-year $1.2 million contract. Later that year, following a birthday party, Leonard got behind the wheel after consuming several drinks and killed a forty-seven year old woman. Leonard's blood alcohol level was 0.19. The state of Missouri's legal limit was .08. Little served 90 days in jail and received four years probation.

So how did the NFL handle Little's infractions?

He was suspended the first eight games of the 99' season and was back in the league as if his past was forgotten. In fact, in 2002, Little managed to ink a five-year $17.5 million contract with the Rams.

Back in 1999, Paul Tagliabue was commissioner and things were considerably less stringent in terms of league sanctions for off-the-field infractions. But in today's NFL, Roger Goodell has made it a point to harshly penalize those players who are unable to abide by the law.

While Stallworth's situation has a striking resemblence to Little's, Stallworth faces an uphill battle if he plans to play in the NFL again. Goodell's track record indicates that he will not be soft on Stallworth and a long, drawn out trial will only hurt him. I would not expect to see Stallworth on the playing field anytime soon.

REALITY OF THE PLAXICO BURRESS SAGA

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

The Plaxico Burress situation is nothing new. A high profile athlete makes headlines after an incident at a Manhattan night club. Gun charges are the result and another prima donna superstar gets suspended by the NFL. The only difference with this situation is that Burress managed to distinguish himself from most potential felons by shooting himself with an unlicensed weapon he foolishly branded while partying with friends and teammates last weekend.

 

And like every incident involving an NFL superstar, the media is all over it. Even Mayor Michael Bloomberg got some face time. 

 

Rumors have begun to surface. Speculation is already running wild. And everyone with a pulse appears to have some sort of opinion on the Burress situation. But what most people disregard is that there are certain realities within this ordeal. Some may disagree with them, but no one can ignore them.

 

Plaxico Burress Is Not Going to Jail

Burress was charged yesterday morning with two felony counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree. This is a Class C felony and the state of New York carries a mandatory prison sentence for carrying an unlicensed loaded handgun. The mandatory minimum prison sentence in New York is three and a half years.

It would appear to look pretty bleak for Burress, however, he is a first time offender. It is very common in New York for first time offenders to plea down to a lesser charge to avoid jail time. Don't be surprised to see Burress plea down to misdemeanor gun charges and receive a virtual slap on the wrist through probation.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg Could Care Less About Plaxico Burress

The Mayor of New York was quite vocal on Monday in response to the notion that Burress might receive preferential treatment in the eyes of the law since he plays for the New York Giants. Bloomberg's desires to see Burress prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law were loud and clear, but even he neglected to mention that this was Burress' first brush with the law.

Make no mistake about this. This was Mayor Bloomberg's opportunity to get national press coverage through a story that has attracted the attention of the entire country. He knew he had an opportunity to showcase New York's strict gun laws and he seized it by urging prosecutors to treat Burress like anyone else. 

Well, just like everyone else in America Mr. Bloomberg, Burress is afforded the presumption of innocence, a fundamental legal right in our nation's criminal justice system.

Antonio Pierce Should Be Very Concerned

It's still very early in the investigation, but Antonio Pierce appears to have serious legal problems ahead. If police discover that Pierce attempted to cover up Burress' accidental shooting of himself, he could be facing obstruction of justice charges. 

In The NFL, Players Are Not Innocent Until Proven Guilty

Roger Goodell has made it very clear that he will impose penalties on players before the legal system has it's chance to run it's normal course. Burress has already been suspended, without pay, for the remainder of the regular season. So how come the presumption of innocence doesn't apply in the NFL? Because it's a private entity. 

Commishioner Goodell's new personal conduct policy has been the subject of debate since it throws out the notion of "innocent until proven guilty," but it has, for the most part, worked to deter players from off-the-field problems. Goodell's decision to suspend Burress is the result of Burress' complete disregard for the league's image and the New York Giant organization. It's up to the state of New York to decide Burress' alleged disregard for the law.

DANGER LURKS

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

With the 2008 NFL Draft officially in the books, fans across the country are anxiously awaiting the start of college football. It's been quite an offseason in the football world and although the gridiron battles are still months away, the legal drama in football is only beginning to heat up.

An optimist would tell you that college football couldn't be in a better place right now. Ratings are up and schools are raking in millions of dollars as a direct result. But it's not all smiles at the collegiate level.

How about the NFL? The most successful professional sport in America. The NFL is in great shape, right? Think again.

A dark cloud is looming over college and professional football and only the so-called football gods can predict the future. While rumors and speculation continue to run rampant, here's an update on some of the hottest - and potentially dangerous - stories that could be highly detrimental to college and professional football.

A Broken System
The BCS is a mess. The revolution has begun to implement some kind of playoff system in college football, but due to contractual obligations and stubborn school officials, the BCS will remain in college football through 2013 (includes Bowl games in 2014).

A recent proposal from Mike Slive, commissioner of the Southeastern Conference, was immediately shot down by just about every major conference commissioner. The proposal called for a "Plus One" scenario where the top four teams would play a semi-final game followed by a championship game the very next week.

LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE: It's a tragedy that college football will remain at the mercy of a flawed system for at least the next four years. What's even more disparaging is knowing that the BCS will remain because of contractual obligations with the Rose Bowl and major television networks.

Bottom line is, contracts can legally be modified. Problem is, a change in the current system will lead to a decrease in profits for those currently under contract with the BCS. It is apparent that those in opposition to a playoff system are skeptical of changing a system that breaks revenue records year after year.

The Never Ending Conspiracy
Spygate is the story that just won't go away. It began immediately following week one of last year's NFL season and Roger Goodell has been trying to dispose of this matter ever since - no pun intended.

A potential bombshell may explode on May 13th when Matt Walsh, a former video assistant for the Patriots, will meet with Roger Goodell to divulge any information he may have regarding his role in "spying" on other teams.

LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE: Matt Walsh's meeting with the NFL is now long overdue. The NFL insists Spygate is a thing of the past and the Patriots organization have vehemently denied any further wrongdoing. If Walsh has any direct evidence, such as an actual video tape, Goodell will have to take swift action against Bill Belichick and the Patriots organization. Belichick and the team's owner, Robert Kraft, will most certainly argue that Walsh acted as a rogue employee and was not directed to tape such activity. However, from a legal standpoint, if Walsh is found to have acted within the scope of his employment responsibilities, the Patriot organization should certainly be held accountable for his wrongful actions.

Regardless of what ensues, Walsh has obtained a bullet-proof indemnification agreement from the NFL. He is fully protected from a civil suit and will be able to speak freely without the worry of being named as a defendant in a lawsuit. Walsh may however be called as a witness in other lawsuits should they occur after he speaks with Roger Goodell.

If Walsh only has verbal information to provide, Spygate will quickly disappear. Walsh's credibility is already in question and without any direct evidence of taping another team in violation of league rules, he will have very little ground to stand on.

A playoff system seems to be inevitable, but not in the very near future.

The End of a Dynasty?
The National Football League has catapaulted itself as the most successful league in American professional sports. Attendence is up. Ratings are up. The Superbowl remains to be by far the most watched sporting event in America each year. While it appears that the NFL will continue it's dominance for years to come, a quiet storm is brewing.

The wealth and prosperity that players and owners have enjoyed over the last ten years may come to a screeching halt in 2011. The current collective bargaining agreement will expire then and the owners can choose to opt out of the current agreement in November of this year. If that happens, the NFL could be facing a lockout in 2011.

LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE: The last time the NFL suffered a lockout was 1987 - under former commissioner Paul Tagliabue. With Roger Goodell as the new Sheriff in town, a lockout would almost seem unthinkable. The problem is, Goodell may not have any control on the situation. If the players and owners cannot come to an accord on revenue sharing, the owners will likely opt out of the current agreement.

End result? A work-stoppage in 2011 and the very real possibility of a cancelled NFL season.

First Ban by The NFL?

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

You know it's pretty bad when even the Cincinnati Bengals no longer want you on their roster because of disciplinary problems.

Assault. Possession of marijuana. Concealment of a weapon. Aggravated assault with a firearm. Providing alcohol to minors. Alleged sexual mischief. And the list goes on.

That wasn't a list of the various crimes NFL players commit on an annual basis. That was a list of crimes that former Bengal Chris Henry has committed during his tenure in the NFL.

How about these numbers? In a three year period, Henry was arrested five times in three different states. Four of those arrests took place within a fourteen month window.

Henry may be a talented athlete, but his ability to get tangled up with the law is staggering. Statistically speaking, he has a promising career as a lifetime criminal.

While everyone is wondering what Roger Goodell is going to do with him, that should be the least of his problems. Henry could be facing serious jail time and looking at his rap sheet, any judge would be silly to not impose a harsh sentence.

Henry is a repeat offender. In fact, he has abused the term. The man clearly has no interest in maintaining a professional standard and he has no business representing himself as a player in the National Football League.

Roger Goodell has only one choice. Henry should be suspended indefinitely pending a judicial outcome of his current charges. If he is found guilty of his current charges of assault and criminal damaging, then Henry should be banned from the league.

Regardless of the fact that Henry has been exonerated on a few charges in the past, he has surrounded himself with numerous criminal probes that have seriously damaged the reputation of all NFL players.

Whether or not Goodell allows Henry to play in the NFL again, Henry's image is already a disgrace. If he's lucky, Henry may play football again, but most likely not in the NFL.

NFL Conspiracy or a Senator's Hidden Agenda?

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

Just when you thought "Spygate" has finally become a thing of the past, the New England Patriots and the NFL have been targeted yet again. This time, Arlen Specter, a Senator from Pennsylvania, has publicly questioned the motives of Roger Goodell and the NFL in their destruction of the videotapes they confiscated from the Patriots earlier in the year.

Conspiracy within the NFL or a cheap publicity stunt?

Senator Specter made headlines this week by questioning Goodell's intentions in handling the investigation surrounding Spygate. In fact, Specter wants to bring Goodell in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee to explain why he destroyed the videotapes related to Spygate.

The notion of destroying evidence immediately translates into an inference of guilt. It leads one to believe that the NFL had something to hide in those tapes. And more importantly, it begs the question - Why did the actual videotapes from Spygate have to be destroyed?

But lets be real here people. We're talking about the NFL, not our nation's national security.

Although these tapes were effectively destroyed and the public will never know exactly what was on those tapes, I'm pretty sure the contents of those tapes would be relatively unimportant to members of the United States Senate.

So why is Senator Specter lambasting Commissioner Goodell and his decision to destroy the videotapes associated with Spygate?

Does he really care what was on those tapes? Doubtful.

Are Specter's constituents concerned about Mr. Goodell's actions? No chance.

Then why does Senator Specter care so much?

The answer is simple.

Senator Specter's number one political contributor is Comcast, a major cable company based out of Philadelphia. Comcast has been unsuccessful in persuading the NFL to allow the "Sunday Ticket" (coverage of every NFL game) and the NFL Network on Comcast's regular cable. Instead, the NFL has insisted on making their product a premium.

Specter has now threatened to strip the NFL of their "anti trust exemption," which permits the league to negotiate it's television contracts for the entire league as opposed to each team negotiating their television deals individually.

Interestingly enough, this is not the first time Specter has attacked the NFL on this issue.

In 2006, Specter publicly denounced the NFL's anti trust exemption and vowed to sponsor legislation that would effectively deprive the NFL from negotiating television contracts for every team.

Specter's public condemnation of Goodell and the NFL has nothing to do with Spygate. It has everything to do with Comcast's desires to get a piece of the billions of dollars the NFL is making off television contracts each year.

And as any shrewd politician would do, Spector chose to cry foul right before the NFL's biggest event. How convenient.

WHAT IF BARRY BONDS PLAYED PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL?

By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible

Barry Bonds has faced just about everything over the last few years. Criticism. Controversy. Joy. Humiliation. Congress. The end result? An indictment by a federal grand jury. I was looking over a timeline of Barry's legal troubles over the years and I began to ponder what his punishment would be if he played in the National Football League.

October 23, 2003
Barry Bonds testifies before a Grand Jury about his alleged knowledge and dealings with BALCO, a laboratory accused of distributing performance enhancing drugs to professional baseball players – especially Bonds. He states he received “cream” and “clear” substances from BALCO but was told they were not steroids.

MLB’s Reaction: nothing

Roger Goodell’s Action: Goodell would have immediately had Bonds come into his Manhattan office for a meeting. He would have most certainly reiterated the steroid policy in the NFL and warned Bonds that a suspension is imminent if further investigation revealed steroid use.

February 17, 2004
Greg Anderson, Bonds’ longtime friend and personal trainer, is heavily investigated in the BALCO scandal and tells federal agents he gave steroids to several baseball players.

March 2, 2004
A newspaper article reports that Bonds, along with Jason Giambi, Gary Sheffield, Marvin Benard, Benito Santiago, Randy Velarde and Bill Romonowski received steroids from BALCO.

MLB’s Reaction: Commissioner Bud Selig finally meets with Bonds in private before a game in April of 2004. No suspension.

Roger Goodell’s Reaction: At this point, evidence is piling up fast against Bonds. Goodell would have required a drug test once a week during the season and in the off-season. He might also secretly put pressure on Bonds’ team’s owner to sever ties with Bonds until any investigation on him comes to an end.

April 8, 2005
Bonds is reported to be continuing to work out with Greg Anderson – who is awaiting trial on charges of distributing performance enhancing drugs.

MLB’s Reaction: MLB implements new steroid policy: 50 game suspension for first time offenders; 100-game ban for second time offenders; and a lifetime ban for a third violation. Nothing is done to Bonds.

Roger Goodell’s Reaction: Goodell’s disgust with Bonds continuing to associate himself with poor character individuals leads him to require that Bonds submit to a drug test before every single game.

2006 MLB Season
Bonds fails a drug test (MLB’s amphetamine policy). Bonds blames it on a teammate.

MLB’s Reaction: Under MLB’s policy, players are not identified for a first positive test for amphetamines.

Roger Goodell’s Reaction: Immediate suspension for at least four games. (In the NFL, that is equivalent to 1/4 of your regular season games).

November 15, 2007
Bonds is indicted by a federal grand jury on four counts of perjury and one count obstruction of justice.

MLB’s Reaction: Nothing formal as of yet.

Roger Goodell’s Reaction: Indefinite suspension with a possible ban from the game.

LEGAL LINE VOL. IV

WHEN FANTASY BECOMES A REALITY
By Scott Daniels, Esq., NFL Draft Bible


Fantasy Sports has evolved into a billion dollar industry and has become an addiction for sports fans across the globe. It is estimated that some 16 million people participated in fantasy sports in 2006. There's even a Fantasy Sports Trade Association that was set up to address various issues and concerns facing the fantasy sports world. With fantasy sports popularity at an all time high, it is fantasy football that has led the movement.

The concept of it all is brilliant. You, the fan, become General Manager of a team you select in a mock, or unrealistic, draft (Hence the name "fantasy"). You select your team based on statistical probabilities and projections and the end result looks like something similar to a starting offense for the probowl.

Since most leagues consist of friends, colleagues or family members, bragging rights are at stake and your knowledge as a fantasy expert depend on your success in the league.

Bragging rights and reputation are not the only thing up for grabs in most fantasy football leagues. League fees or "buy ins" remain a major part of fantasy football. The first question that a potential league participant will ask when invited into a league is, "How much is the buy in?" Why is that? Because at the end of the season, the league champion not only proclaims himself as the guru of fantasy football, but he or she takes home a sizable cash prize made up of each participant's league fee.

If fantasy football has become so popular among fans, just think how popular it is among players. It's not a secret either. Often times during interviews, players will joke about how they like to see their opponents put up big numbers because that specific player is on their fantasy team. Now, if the majority of these fantasy leagues require a league fee that goes to the winner of the league, just think how large these fees are when the league consists of NFL players. With the league minimum at a mere $285,000, NFL players are most likely buying in for more than a few hundred.

The issue is not how much money is allegedly spent on these leagues by NFL players. The issue is whether or not an NFL player's participation in a fantasy football league for money is gambling. If so, it clearly violates a longstanding NFL principle that carries a lifetime ban as a penalty. In fact, in every player contract, it is expressly stated that "association with gamblers or gambling activities in a manner tending to bring discredit to the NFL" is conduct detrimental to the league. The penalty, as stated in each player contract: "severe penalties up to and including a fine and or suspension from the NFL for life."

Gambling is the risking of money on an outcome that is uncertain. Wagering on the Eagles to beat the Giants by seven is gambling. Wagering on the point total to exceed 44 points in the Bears Redskins game is gambling.

But what about fantasy football? What about the fact that an NFL player might have serious financial implications with how an opposing player fares in the game?

Take this hypothetical scenario:

Week 16. Lions at the Broncos. Under two minutes to play in the 4th Quarter. Broncos lead 31 - 7. Broncos star cornerback Champ Bailey is still in the ballgame. Bailey is probably the best corner in the league and rarely gives up an easy reception. He finds himself covering Calvin Johnson, rookie wide receiver - and coincidentally, Bailey's number two receiver on his fantasy team. Bailey knows that it's Championship week in his fantasy league where the cash prize is $100,000. Lions go deep to Johnson and Bailey fortuitously slips and blows his coverage. Johnson waltzes into the end zone for a 50 yard touchdown. Six points for the Lions. Eleven points for Bailey in his fantasy football league (50 yard reception = 5 points; touchdown = 6 points).

The Broncos already won the game, but one can see how easy it is to draw a negative inference from this scenario. Roger Goodell and NFL feel that a player's participation in a fantasy football league - even if it's for money - is not gambling. Others would beg to differ.

Currently, NFL players are free to participate in fantasy football. For those of you that claim to be fantasy experts, put yourself in the shoes of an NFL player. Would you be enticed to lay down on one play if it translated into an extra $100,000?