The Flaws in the NFL’s Investigation into Deflategate

 

            The Wells Report on “Deflategate,” the Mitchell Report on Steroids, and the Freeh Report regarding Penn State all suffer from three fundamental flaws.  First, the investigator and author of the report serves as the judge and juror regarding the facts of the event.  This condition lacks fairness because the author will obviously agree with the report’s findings.  Second, the accused is neither given the opportunity to present arguments or evidence nor the ability to challenge those in the report.  Third, confidentiality is not maintained, and individuals are viewed as guilty even if they were innocent.  This hurdle can be impossible to overcome, and individuals can be permanently scarred.  A better system would be for both sides of a controversy to conduct its own investigation and have an independent party review the evidence and come to a conclusion.  In short, it would be best to replicate the American system of jurisprudence into these controversies.

© 2020 by Michael B. Abramson