On Monday, domestic violence-related charges against former Panthers defensive end Greg Hardy were dropped. The prosecutor and media reports indicate that Hardy and alleged victim Nicole Holder reached a settlement, and that may explain why Holder made herself unavailable for the court date, thus forcing the court to drop the charges.
As you may recall, Hardy was initially convicted of assault charges in a bench trial on July 15, but in North Carolina an unusual process then gives defendants the option of a trial by jury.
In the past, dropped charges may have meant the end of the story. But under the NFL's new code of conduct policy, Hardy will be a test case of sorts for the league. And he may, in fact, not be in the clear.
With Hardy's case -- and all others going forward -- the NFL doesn't have to base discipline only on the legal outcome. Commissioner Roger Goodell can order an independent investigation into what happened with Hardy. In the meantime, he remains on the commissioner's exempt list, which is essentially a form of paid leave.
According to a league spokesperson, "[Hardy's] status remains unchanged until we fully review the matter."
So what will the league review? According to the police report, here's how Holder described what happened just after the night Hardy was arrested.
"Hardy picked me up and threw me into the tile tub area in his bathroom," she said in the complaint. "I have bruises from head to toe, including my head, neck, back, shoulders, arms, legs, elbow and feet. Hardy pulled me from the tub by my hair, screaming at me that he was going to kill me, break my arms and other threats that I completely believe.
"He drug me across the bathroom and out into the bedroom. Hardy choked me with both hands around my throat while I was lying on the floor. Hardy picked me up over his head and threw me onto a couch covered in assault rifles and/or shotguns. I landed on those weapons."
In the July bench trial, Mecklenburg District Judge Becky Thorne Tin also found that Hardy tried to cover up these actions with a fabricated 911 call blaming the victim. She sentenced him to 18 months of probation and a 60-day suspended sentence, pending the appeal.
Does any of this disappear just because Hardy may have paid for the victim's silence? Would Holder have any reason to be afraid of him if she didn't comply with his wishes that the case be settled? After the education that the NFL has been getting -- and distributing to its players -- it should be abundantly clear that victims of domestic violence don't always behave in a convenient way, or in a way that makes it easy to prosecute the perpetrators.
If Hardy is innocent of charges, of course you'd want the NFL to be able to determine that as well. He spent nearly a season on the commissioner's exempt list, being paid his $13.1 million while he sat for the last 15 games of the season. The NFL has a vested interest in making sure that innocent men aren't unfairly penalized.
But if Hardy is guilty, as a bench trial found, and he then paid the victim to go into hiding so the charges were dropped -- how can the new NFL ignore this? If he beat and threatened to kill Holder, then tried to frame her in the 911 call, how can writing a check make it all disappear? If it does, then the NFL can't really say that it has changed at all.
The NFL has to credibly look into Hardy's actions. If there is reason to believe Hardy did what he was accused of (and initially found guilty of), those circumstances would mean a six-game suspension, in addition to his time on the exempt list, for a first offense. Given the magnitude of what Hardy was accused of, however -- called extenuating circumstances in the policy -- he could be eligible for an even longer suspension.
Holder may remain silent about Hardy, but the NFL can't pretend to be deaf to victims of domestic violence any more.