Under Penalty of Catapult

Let’s consider two cases. In the first case, a driver with an elevated blood-alcohol level accidentally strikes and kills a pedestrian who was jaywalking. The driver enters a guilty plea for manslaughter and receives a sentence of 30 days in jail, two years house arrest, 1,000 hours of community service, eight years probation, and permanent revocation of his driver’s license. The driver also reaches a financial settlement with the victim’s family.

In the second case, a driver is intentionally speeding well beyond the posted limit when he strikes another vehicle, killing two sisters inside of it. The driver here is acquitted of vehicular homicide and is only fined a few hundred dollars for minor traffic violations. Since the driver was using his employer’s vehicle, the employer reaches a financial settlement with the victims’ family.

Both cases receive media coverage. In the second case, coverage is muted and the press is generally sympathetic to the driver. In the first case, coverage is disproportionately higher and uniformly negative towards the driver. The coverage is so extensive that the first driver’s employer suspends him without pay for an indefinite period – even though, unlike the second driver, the accident had no relation to the first driver’s employment.

What explains this? The first driver was a professional football player, Donté Stallworth. The second driver is a New Jersey police officer, Robert Higbee. Even though Higbee’s crime was far greater – and he received no substantial criminal or professional punishment – the establishment media is constrained by its pro-police, anti-athlete bias. Hence, Stallworth “got away with” killing one person, while Higbee is the tragic victim of circumstances despite killing two people.

Neither Stallworth nor Higbee intended to kill their victims. But while Stallworth simply made an error in judgment, Higbee acted with reckless disregard for human life. Higbee was speeding, hypocritically, to catch another driver that Higbee wanted to ticket for speeding. Higbee decided the lives of other drivers on the road were less important than his ability to catch and ticket a driver. But again, Higbee’s intentional actions were excused by the courts and the press as “following police procedure,” while Stallworth – a man who took full responsibility for his actions and had no prior criminal record – has been labelled a killer who wasn’t punished enough by the courts.

National Football League CEO Roger Goodell suspended Stallworth indefinitely following his criminal plea. In a statement released to the public, Goodell said
[quote]The conduct reflected in your guilty plea resulted in the tragic loss of life and was inexcusable. While the criminal justice system has determined the legal consequences of this incident, it is my responsibility as NFL Commissioner to determine appropriate league discipline for your actions, which have caused irreparable harm to the victim and his family, your club, your fellow players and the NFL.

[ . . . ]

There is no reasonable dispute that your continued eligibility for participation at this time would undermine the integrity of and public confidence in our league. Accordingly, I have decided to suspend you indefinitely, effective immediately. In due course, we will contact your representatives to schedule a meeting with you, after which I will make a final determination on discipline. Pending my final determination, you will not be permitted to visit the club’s facility or participate in any team activities.[/quote]
Goodell is certainly entitled to discipline Stallworth under the various contractual arrangements that govern the NFL, but it’s curious that he would resort to this level of grandstanding rhetoric. It’s unlikely that the act of one player – out of more than 1,700 – would “undermine the integrity of and public confidence in” the NFL, especially when Stallworth’s actions did not occur in the course of his employment.

Now in the case of Higbee, one could certainly say that his actions undermined “the integrity of and public confidence in” the police. He killed two people and suffered no consequences whatsoever. Yet, again, the courts and the press tend to avoid making such judgments about police. Football players are much easier targets, and the public tolerates a certain level of bigotry against them.

In one sense, Goodell’s actions reflect the natural differences between private and public organizations. Goodell is understandably concerned about the public perception of his league and its employees. While it’s laughable to suggest Stallworth threatened the league’s “integrity,” most businesses would not risk a public backlash by turning a blind eye to employee misconduct. In contrast, the state is primarily concerned with preserving and expanding its monopoly on aggression. The state will not punish one of its own agents when doing so risks exposing the institution to further scrutiny.

Of course, it’s comical to expect the state’s courts to treat a state agent more harshly – or even just as harshly – than a regular person. Stallworth may have fared better then some because he had the financial means to defend himself, but he faced a far more hostile media than Higbee ever did. The press and the state are one, and even well-known professional athletes can’t overcome that combination.

Two innocent women are dead and their acknowledged killer faces no criminal or personal consequences. This is not justice by any standard. The state and its press lapdogs have protected the killer without shame or reservation, and in doing so devalued the innocent lives lost. Yet somehow this same state-press alliance expects the public to be more outraged because a man who made a terrible mistake and tried to make amends isn’t being subject to enough public scorn. One hopes the public can see through such nonsense and realize that the police are a far greater threat to their life and liberty then any professional football player. But these cases don’t inspire much confidence.