OT: Sparks Player Arrested for Burglary & Assault

[j66kicker]

I'm not sure how this works now that the players have opted out of their CBA, but ordinarily in pro leagues disciplinary matters not related to team conduct are supposed to be handled by the league, not the team, because otherwise every team has an incentive to shirk its responsibility (see, e.g., NFL and Goodell constantly being dragged into double-standards battles as different teams and players argue player X on team Y got a more lenient penalty than player A on team B). So I don't know if the Sparks even could have even if they wanted to.

But I also don't think it makes sense for the Sparks to have to forfeit anything - unless she is banned for life for her off-the-court conduct, whether she missed the first 10 games of the season or the next 10, the Sparks are still without her for 10 games. Now that we know what her "punishment" should be, her prior participation is irrelevant from that standpoint.

I believe the WNBA CBA is still in effect until the end of the season.

 

[tchalla1]

I believe the WNBA CBA is still in effect until the end of the season.

Correct. Under a provision in their CBA, the players decided to opt out of their existing CBA. However, the terms and conditions of the current CBA are still in effect until the end of this season when the CBA expires. The opt out only means that they will not be renewing the existing CBA, but rather will negotiate a new contract.

 

[tchalla1]

She should have been suspended before the season started.
The Sparks should have to forfeit any games she played in.

This would have been violative of the player's protective rights of her CBA with the WNBA. There are some notable exceptions, for example, imminent danger or harm, but other than those situations, she could not have been suspended without appropriate due process being followed per the contract. The Sparks have no requirement to assess penalties of the league per the CBA, and therefore it was the league's responsibility to act, not the Sparks. The exception would have been whether the Sparks felt that the player violated team rules, and engaged in the age old "conduct detrimental to the team."

 

[RockyMTblue2]

Sometimes people are too quiet with the news - you know! @RSHERMVIKES , your post, priceless obtw....

WNBA's Riquna Williams Suspended After Domestic Violence Arrest

 

[Plebe]

Another very informative, well-balanced article by SI's legal expert:

What comes next after the WNBA's suspension of Williams?

Breaking down why the WNBPA is appealing Riquna Williams's 10-game suspension from the WNBA, reviewing the grievance process that awaits Williams and evaluating the legal arguments for both sides.

www.si.com

1. Putting the 10-game suspension into context and why the WNBPA is appealing
2. The grievance process that awaits Williams
3. Six likely legal arguments by the WNBA in the grievance
4. Six likely legal arguments by Williams and the WNBPA in the grievance

 

[CamrnCrz1974]

Another very informative, well-balanced article by SI's legal expert:

What comes next after the WNBA's suspension of Williams?

Breaking down why the WNBPA is appealing Riquna Williams's 10-game suspension from the WNBA, reviewing the grievance process that awaits Williams and evaluating the legal arguments for both sides.

www.si.com

1. Putting the 10-game suspension into context and why the WNBPA is appealing
2. The grievance process that awaits Williams
3. Six likely legal arguments by the WNBA in the grievance
4. Six likely legal arguments by Williams and the WNBPA in the grievance

@Plebe , thank you for sharing this link. As someone who practices labor and employment law (and who has done so for government agencies that have classified service/covered employees and an administrative appellate mechanism for disciplinary actions), I wanted to add a few thoughts.

Regarding the potential legal arguments for Williams/WNBPA, SI Legal Expert Michael McCann states:

Second, we don’t yet know her legal defenses. Williams might convincingly argue that she had a legal right to enter the residence (which, if true, would defeat the burglary charge). She could also maintain that Davis and Wilson were the aggressors and that the gun-brandishing part of the narrative was greatly exaggerated.

The imposition of a WNBA suspension before the legal process arguably plays out therefore presents an uncomfortable risk: if Williams is later exonerated in court, the WNBA will have punished an innocent player.

This goes back to one of the points that I have made on Rebkell and in discussions with friends. A criminal conviction is not the same process as an administrative disciplinary action in the workplace, nor does it have nearly the same burden of proof.

In the criminal context, it is possible that Williams may not be convicted on any or all of the criminal charges. Perhaps witnesses refuse to testify. Maybe there was a procedural defect. Perhaps the government-obtained physical evidence was obtained improperly/illegally/under coercion, thus making any after-acquired evidence "fruit of the poisonous tree" and inadmissible. Or maybe a jury simply finds Williams to be a more credible witness, should the case proceed to trial.

Even if Williams is found to be "not guilty," that does not mean she is "innocent." A "not guilty" criminal verdict simply means that the prosecution did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt to the tribunal.

In the administrative discipline process, I have always suggested that investigations have specific categories of terminology for their findings, pertaining to the specific allegations: -- unfounded, exonerated, unresolved, or sustained. This is how I define (generally speaking) those terms.

TERM​	DEFINITION​
Unfounded	It is found the reported misconduct (or conduct) or behavior did not occur or did not occur as alleged
Exonerated	The incident occurred, but the conduct or behavior was lawful and proper.
Unresolved	There is insufficient evidence to either prove or disprove the allegation. – OR –​ The inquiry into this allegation is inactivated pending development of further information.
Sustained	The allegation is supported by sufficient evidence to justify a reasonable conclusion the alleged misconduct/inappropriate behavior occurred.

For Williams to be "innocent" (using the word from the article linked above) -- which means the allegations would be unfounded in the administrative context and she could thus avoid any punishment -- she must have an argument akin to: "I was not there (or it was not me). Here is indisputable proof that I was nowhere in the vicinity of the residence where this incident took place on that date/time or at any point relevant to the allegations involved here."

An employer can impose an administrative disciplinary action, irrespective of whether there is a conviction in the criminal context. The issue is whether an employee engaged in the underlying conduct (or there is reasonable evidence to demonstrate that he/she did) and whether that conduct violates the employer's policies or employee handbook provisions.

In other words, a "sustained" allegation in the administrative context can occur before the criminal proceedings have taken place or reached a conclusion, or it can occur even if there is a "not guilty" finding in the criminal proceedings.

 

[Geew1992]

I think the teams need to start taking responsibility for the players, not just the league. The Sparks did zero in regards to Williams. They let the league handle it just to help the team

Someone said a way to get people interested in the league maybe to have the WNBA games played before the NBA games. I think that may get fans in the seats.