The NFL Blotter: Atrocities and Inconsistencies

Professional football, and more specifically crime and punishment therein, seems to be dominating the newswire of late. So too then is it overtaking the topics of this column.

The last ten years have seen nearly exponential increases in the incidents of pro football players involved in the commission of heinous and felonious crimes. From repeated cases of domestic violence, to DUI, to murder, and practically everything in between, it is getting more and more difficult to distinguish pro rosters from the lists of America's Most Wanted.

The 24-hour a day sports news channels, magazines and blogs have spent countless hours and words trying to determine the rationale for such increases. For the purpose of this piece, I am considering instead the inconsistencies in the punishments doled out for a selection of recent cases of aberrant behavior, as they seem to suggest an anomaly in the hierarchy of crime.

There are three examples in particular which have dominated the headlines this past off-season: The individual cases of Michael Vick, Plaxico Burress, and Donte Stallworth. Each of these talented NFL stars has been convicted and sentenced recently for separate and divergent crimes. Vick, as described in a recent installment of this blog, was found guilty of running an interstate dog-fighting and gambling ring and for callous and cruel treatment of animals. His sentence: Two years in Leavenworth prison.

Plaxico Burress was found guilty of a felony gun charge after pleading down from a more serious offense. His punishment? Also two years in a federal penitentiary. Apparently, based on the sentences imposed, the possession of an unlicensed firearm is a crime equivalent to the multiple premeditated murders of dogs and in the running of an illegal gambling operation across several states. What other conclusion can be drawn?

But perhaps the most incongruous example of justice as it applies to NFL ballplayers is that of Donte Stallworth. Mr. Stallworth was guilty of DUI, a not uncommon transgression especially among pro athletes, who - because of his inebriated state - struck and killed a pedestrian in the early-morning hours while driving his Bentley in Miami, Florida. His sentence for pleading guilty to DUI Manslaughter? For the taking of a human life because of his decision to get behind the wheel with a blood alcohol level nearly twice the legal limit? For destroying a family and killing the husband, father and chief breadwinner?

30 days.

That's it - 30 days in jail and Stallworth will be free to resume his career. To continue to earn millions of dollars and bask in the glow of cheering fans and SportsCenter highlights. To catch touchdown passes and sign autographs for children looking to him as an inspiration and a role model.

So if we are to understand correctly, the commission of a crime which results in a human death is worthy of just 4% of the punishment of that due a dog-killer. 4% of the total sentence applicable to someone convicted of carrying a gun. This seems to be the only math that works here.

Now don't get me wrong. I have no problem with the sentence Vick was given. And though Burress' seems a bit harsh, I can certainly see the value in the message sent to other would-be gun toters.

But what about the message we are sending to drunk drivers? DUI is a crime reaching near pandemic proportions. Our roads and highways are littered with wreaths, crosses and flowers left as shrines to those killed by drivers too inebriated to avoid running them down. How can we justify 30 days in jail for such a crime when that is the typical sentence given for such crimes as petty theft and contempt of court.

Yes, there is contempt of court here in this case. Such a bogus sentence from the court is as contemptible as it is insulting: To the victim's family, to the justice system, and to the American people. And where is the outcry? Where are the protesters marching in the streets? Where are the editorials demanding the removal of judges and the revision of law? How have we let this happen?

We can do the math and we can mark our history. But this example of social studies is nothing less than a complete failure.