Administrative Transgression

pstrongDrug Testing, Darrell Russell and The Probowl “parole-like” policy/strong/p pDIV align="left" TABLE cellpadding="5"TR VALIGN="TOP"TDIMG SRC= "../sites/default/files/arch_img/452/photo_1_supplement.jpg" //td/trTR VALIGN="TOP"TD/td/trTR VALIGN="TOP"TDTR VALIGN="TOP"TD pby TJ Johnston/p pTo the casual (and possibly avid) sports fan, Oakland Raider Darrell Russell’s four-game suspension due to the National Football League’s drug policy appears to be deserved. This was his second offense, meaning a loss of $112,000 per week for No. 96 as well as being benched. Already in the program, the two-time All-Pro is reported to have submitted to over 200 drug tests./p pHowever, Russell’s sidelining wasn’t the result of a dirty urinalysis test: there was none to speak of./p pSpeaking on Russell’s behalf, agent Leigh Steinberg stated the NFL called him to take another test when Russell wasn’t home; his lack of a prompt response was construed as a “failure to comply,” which is the equivalent of testing positive. This detail, “an administrative transgression” in Steinberg’s words, was buried or otherwise omitted in most reports./p pLeague policy on drug use is as follows: any player with a positive UA of illicit or legal drugs enters into a three-stage program./p pIn Stage One, he undergoes a psychiatric evaluation and enters into a mandatory treatment contract. A three-week check fine is charged for failing to cooperate./p pStage Two is a series of UA’s, up to ten a month during a two-year period. A first positive means loss of four weeks’ pay, plus a suspension if he’s been previously fined. A second positive results in a four to six week suspension./p pAny player in Stage Three who tests “dirty” or doesn’t test is scrutinized for three years and could take up to 10 UA’s a month. Failure results in a minimum of one year’s exile./p pThis is worth repeating: not testing, in the eyes of the NFL, means testing positive. And apparently, not returning their calls in a timely fashion constitutes same./p pWhen I asked Raiders spokesperson Craig Long for an analog outside the sports realm, he gave a “no comment,” citing league policy. Not surprising given that the NFL is notoriously tight-lipped about disciplining players on drug issues. Russell intimated marijuana use for the previous action taken against him: he claimed to have tested on “second hand smoke.”/p pTeammate Charles Woodson, himself charged with a DUI, pithily likened policy enforcement to “being out on parole.” However one feels about athletes and their off-field peccadilloes, there might be “substance” to Woodson’s assessment./p pIs it just like parole? “Pretty close,” according to Naneen Karrasker, coordinator of the Criminal Justice Consortium. Karrasker describes a typical parole scenario in California: a parolee is assigned to a parole officer for a two-year period, meeting weekly or monthly./p pIn most cases, the parolee must remain in the “county of commitment” where he/she was originally sentenced. Under a PO’s supervision, a parolee might be subjected to UA’s. On a second or third positive, he/she would be sent back to prison and face an extended parole upon release. At the PO’s discretion, the parolee might enter treatment (however limited those options might be)./p pMost PO’s, Karrasker adds, are former prison guards. In the last 20 years, PO’s have carried sidearms. “They changed from being helpers to police.” She also cites that a major difference between Russell and a typical parolee would be the degree of stigmatization and disorientation upon release./p pA parolee could be in violation for associating with a known felon. Russell, on the other hand, could hang with Baltimore Raven Ray Lewis without a black mark against him./p pWe’ve all heard the joke, “You can’t spell FELON without NFL.” But even felons are entitled their day in court. Presumption of innocence until proof of guilt is a cornerstone of due process. Due process is also the grease that keeps workplace justice running. By sanctioning Russell for failing a drug test sans sample, the NFL showed they got that principle ass-backward. The appropriate time would have been when they found something in the cup Russell filled. I assume even a UA done by a parole agent is conducted on this presumption. /p pFor all the privilege afforded him, Russell is still entitled a chance to answer the NFL’s charges, as anyone else in peril of losing their livelihood when brought on a substance claim./p pDue process appears to be absent in Russell’s case. Wouldn’t taking 200 UA’s already cut Russell some slack? I guess not. Is returning the Pee Police’s call a little late just cause for a mandatory leave of absence? Judging on play review, it is. Somebody missed that call. /p p/p/td/tr/td/tr/table/div/p