Sources: Charges will not be brought!

[NJ-STEELER]

Let us hope it is true. Let us also hope that Ben learns to stay out of bad situations and watch the company he keeps. He can still face a suspension by the Steelers or the league. He also faces the possibility of a civil suit.

i believe it was shefter (or another football guy) on espn that said braylon edwards had something similiar happen to him last year and there was no suspension from the league.


and they brought up the possibility of the steelers themselves of possibly giving him some discipiliary action like they did with santonio 2 years ago.


hopefully ART II suspends him for the 1st preseason game

[Herewegosteelers!]

Let's hope so, so we can look forward to next season! If this is true, Ben can't put himself in this situation again or he will be an ex-Steeler...

[NorthCoast]

thank god hopefully this is really true. seems legit to me though. we dodged a huge bullet that is for sure.

Umm, we didn't dodge anything. Ben dodged a bullet...really hope he learned some lessons from this one. Just like with Tiger, sometimes money makes you believe you are more than you really are.

[pfelix73]

Sounds like great news.. I had a feeling they didn't have a case, or he would've been arrested a long time ago.

Time to move past this and get on with the draft. I guess this means no Tim Tebow with the #18 pick- bummer.

[Dee Dub]

I said here weeks ago that there was no case. No witness, no physical evidence, and no video evidence. That means no case.

[feltdizz]

BlackJack, Dizz and BigRob must be destroyed right now.

I'm disgusted! I paid all that money to get that girl drunk and set Ben up for this and this is how I'm repaid? Damn... I was looking forward to a season without Ben so Dixon could show the world how he could win 14 games in a row and win 2 SB's.

[feltdizz]

This is nice news, confirmation at the presser Monday afternoon would be GREAT news.

Anyone know - can charges be brought at any time later the DA decides it's the right thing to do? I don't think that's "double jeapordy", is it?

Meaning ... how long does Ben have to keep looking over his shoulder? Meaning ... would it really be over forever?

Thanks -

Ben needs to be looking over his shoulder at all times. And he also needs to stop going into college bars. If this doesn't wake Ben up, nothing will. Nobody has seen Ben in 5 weeks. When we do see him again, it would be nice to see him with a haircut & about 20 pounds lighter that what he looked like the night of 3/5.

uhhhhhh Ben wasn't charged so he is free to do as he pleases. He owes us and the Steelers nothing off the field.

[hawaiiansteel]

I said here weeks ago that there was no case. No witness, no physical evidence, and no video evidence. That means no case.

word is that the accusing woman had some inconsistencies in the statements that she made to the police.

[hawaiiansteel]

If Roethlisberger isn't charged, he could still face league or team discipline

Posted by Mike Florio on April 9, 2010


Our pal Brooks of SportsByBrooks.com has dissected various flaws arising from ESPN's rush to report that Ocmulgee (Ga.) Judicial Circuit District Attorney Fred Bright will announce Monday that Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger won't be charged with sexual assault. But Brooks ultimately concludes, and we agree, that ESPN wouldn't go with this story if the reporters had the tiniest sliver of doubt regarding its accuracy.

If that's what Bright announces on Monday -- that Roethlisberger won't be charged -- the matter won't be completely closed. Roethlisberger still could be sued, pursuant to the much lower standard of proof applicable to civil suits.

More importantly (as it relates to his NFL career), Roethlisberger could face discipline from the league or from the team.

The NFL could impose a penalty under the Personal Conduct Policy, even without a criminal prosecution. "While criminal activity is clearly outside the scope of permissible conduct," the Personal Conduct Policy reads, "and persons who engage in criminal activity will be subject to discipline, the standard of conduct for persons employed in the NFL is considerably higher. It is not simply enough to avoid being found guilty of a crime. Instead, as an employee of the NFL or a member club, you are held to a higher standard and expected to conduct yourself in a way that is responsible, promotes the values upon which the League is based, and is lawful." (Emphasis in original.)

The Personal Conduct Policy then lists the various circumstances in which discipline may be imposed. The first two items specifically mention "criminal offenses." Later, the list includes "[c]onduct that undermines or puts at risk the integrity and reputation of the NFL, NFL clubs, or NFL players." An easy case can be made that, even without charges, Roethlisberger's reportedly admitted conduct -- sexual contact with a 20-year-old girl in the bathroom stall of a nightclub -- "undermines or puts at risk the integrity and reputation" of the league, its teams, and its players.

That said, the Personal Conduct Policy contains some potentially conflicting language regarding the issue of discipline. "Unless the case involves significant bodily harm," the document states, "a first offense will generally not result in discipline until there has been a disposition of the proceeding." This sentence strongly implies that, for a first offense, the player won't be disciplined absent the filing of criminal charges.

It's possible that, in Roethlisberger's case, the league will regard the Nevada incident as a first offense, and thus treat the Georgia incident as a second offense. The problem, of course, is that it's impossible for the league to conclude whether either incident constitutes an "offense" unless the league has conducted its own investigation.

As a result, we tend to think that, despite language suggesting that punishment can be imposed without criminal charges or an arrest, the league will be reluctant to go down that path, unless Roethlisberger would ultimately lose the civil case in Nevada and then lose the separate civil case (if one filed) in Georgia.

Of course, that won't stop the team from taking action. In an effort to commence the process of reclaiming a reputation of good behavior, the Steelers could choose to impose a short suspension (one or two games) for conduct detrimental to the team. Roethlisberger could fight the suspension with the assistance of the union, and unlike league-imposed suspensions Roethlisberger would be entitled to have the matter reviewed by an independent arbitrator. That said, Roethlisberger's long-term interests likely would be best served by taking whatever punishment the Rooneys mete out, to be glad that he avoided an outcome that could have been much worse, and to avoid moving forward any circumstances that could give rise to similar allegations.

Again, all of this assumes that he won't be charged. If the ESPN report is indeed accurate, we expect others to be "confirming" it over the weekend.

[url="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/04/09/if-roethlisberger-isnt-charged-he-could-still-face-league-or-team-discipline/"]http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... iscipline/[/url]

[Shawn]

This is nice news, confirmation at the presser Monday afternoon would be GREAT news.

Anyone know - can charges be brought at any time later the DA decides it's the right thing to do? I don't think that's "double jeapordy", is it?

Meaning ... how long does Ben have to keep looking over his shoulder? Meaning ... would it really be over forever?

Thanks -

No that would not be double jeapordy. That would only pertain to a trial. You can't try someone for the same crime twice. The DA has the ability to bring charges 7 years after the infraction which is the statute of limitations. If any new evidence arises then he could bring charges at that time.