TXBRONC
10-13-2007, 07:10 PM
This article is from today's RMN. (Disclaimer: Author of the thread is not responsible for any self-inflicted wounds or damage to personal property due to duress.)
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/nfl/article/0,2777,DRMN_23918_5721614,00.html
Henry gets the official word on failed test
Broncos back likely will appeal ruling
By Jeff Legwold, Rocky Mountain News
October 13, 2007
The court case involving running back Travis Henry's possible one- year suspension is still at least three weeks away from a resolution, but the NFL's discipline policy in the matter continues to march on.
League sources confirmed Friday that Henry officially has been informed, in writing, by the league's Management Council that he is in a violation of the league's drug policy. Any player who has a positive test is sent what other players have called a "violation letter."
By league rules, Henry has five days after receiving the letter to then inform the league if he intends to appeal the decision.
Though it isn't known exactly what day Henry received his letter, he likely would have to officially inform the league - also in writing, as per the league's collective bargaining agreement - of his decision to appeal before the end of the upcoming week.
Neither Henry nor Broncos officials, in the team's bye week, could be reached for comment Friday. Last week, Henry said, "The NFL told me not to discuss nothing."
A league spokesman said Friday the league would have no comment on Henry's case because of confidentiality rules in the drug-testing program.
From the league's perspective, Henry's "B" urine sample - players give two samples when tested - would not have to be tested in order for its disciplinary procedures to begin. The testing of the "B" sample is a usual option for the player, but not required in the policy.
Henry filed a lawsuit in Suffolk (N.Y.) County court last month to keep the league from testing his "B" sample. The league got that case moved to federal court in Brooklyn, N.Y., and is trying to get the lawsuit thrown out.
Henry's lawyers are trying to keep the case in state court.
But the league's testing policy shows the player may ask for the "B" sample to be tested - within two days of notification of a positive test from the "A" sample - but that the disciplinary policy, the sources said, is set in motion by the "A" sample.
That is independent of Henry's court case in New York, where Henry is challenging parts of the league's drug policy, including how his "B" sample would be tested. Henry's lawyers and the league's lawyers were informed this week by a federal judge they have two weeks to prepare motions and another week to prepare responses to those motions.
Henry also would be given time to prepare for an appeal hearing with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, or someone Goodell designates to oversee the hearing, so the court case and his appeal hearing with the league could conclude about the same time, near the end of this month or early November.
Henry will be able to practice and play for the Broncos during the court case and appeal process. If he wins his court case, he is expected to keep playing; the league would likely then appeal that ruling.
In his court case, Henry is claiming that the NFL violated its own substance abuse policy by not allowing his experts to be on hand when the urine sample was tested. The NFL, according to the sources, is contending the rules are clear that players can have their own expert present for testing, as stated in the league's CBA, but that the expert cannot be affiliated with a lab or testing service and that the expert Henry wished to use was affiliated with a lab.
Henry is believed to be disputing other aspects of the testing procedures as well. He is expected to argue that the test result showed too low a threshold for Henry to have used illegal drugs himself rather than a positive test that resulted from secondhand inhalation. Henry, sources said, was told he tested positive for marijuana.
But missing a scheduled test, or the presence of one of several designated diuretics in the urine, also can be counted as a positive test.
Because Henry served a four-week, league-imposed suspension in September 2005 while playing for the Tennessee Titans, he would be facing a yearlong suspension this time. Also, already having been suspended once, he was required to be tested up to 10 times a month for a period of two years; that two-year period was scheduled to be up Oct. 1.
If suspended for a year, Henry would be in "Stage 3" of the league's testing program and he could be tested up to 10 times a month for the remainder of his career.
Henry is the league's second-leading rusher this season, with 498 yards.
legwoldj@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-2359
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/nfl/article/0,2777,DRMN_23918_5721614,00.html
Henry gets the official word on failed test
Broncos back likely will appeal ruling
By Jeff Legwold, Rocky Mountain News
October 13, 2007
The court case involving running back Travis Henry's possible one- year suspension is still at least three weeks away from a resolution, but the NFL's discipline policy in the matter continues to march on.
League sources confirmed Friday that Henry officially has been informed, in writing, by the league's Management Council that he is in a violation of the league's drug policy. Any player who has a positive test is sent what other players have called a "violation letter."
By league rules, Henry has five days after receiving the letter to then inform the league if he intends to appeal the decision.
Though it isn't known exactly what day Henry received his letter, he likely would have to officially inform the league - also in writing, as per the league's collective bargaining agreement - of his decision to appeal before the end of the upcoming week.
Neither Henry nor Broncos officials, in the team's bye week, could be reached for comment Friday. Last week, Henry said, "The NFL told me not to discuss nothing."
A league spokesman said Friday the league would have no comment on Henry's case because of confidentiality rules in the drug-testing program.
From the league's perspective, Henry's "B" urine sample - players give two samples when tested - would not have to be tested in order for its disciplinary procedures to begin. The testing of the "B" sample is a usual option for the player, but not required in the policy.
Henry filed a lawsuit in Suffolk (N.Y.) County court last month to keep the league from testing his "B" sample. The league got that case moved to federal court in Brooklyn, N.Y., and is trying to get the lawsuit thrown out.
Henry's lawyers are trying to keep the case in state court.
But the league's testing policy shows the player may ask for the "B" sample to be tested - within two days of notification of a positive test from the "A" sample - but that the disciplinary policy, the sources said, is set in motion by the "A" sample.
That is independent of Henry's court case in New York, where Henry is challenging parts of the league's drug policy, including how his "B" sample would be tested. Henry's lawyers and the league's lawyers were informed this week by a federal judge they have two weeks to prepare motions and another week to prepare responses to those motions.
Henry also would be given time to prepare for an appeal hearing with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, or someone Goodell designates to oversee the hearing, so the court case and his appeal hearing with the league could conclude about the same time, near the end of this month or early November.
Henry will be able to practice and play for the Broncos during the court case and appeal process. If he wins his court case, he is expected to keep playing; the league would likely then appeal that ruling.
In his court case, Henry is claiming that the NFL violated its own substance abuse policy by not allowing his experts to be on hand when the urine sample was tested. The NFL, according to the sources, is contending the rules are clear that players can have their own expert present for testing, as stated in the league's CBA, but that the expert cannot be affiliated with a lab or testing service and that the expert Henry wished to use was affiliated with a lab.
Henry is believed to be disputing other aspects of the testing procedures as well. He is expected to argue that the test result showed too low a threshold for Henry to have used illegal drugs himself rather than a positive test that resulted from secondhand inhalation. Henry, sources said, was told he tested positive for marijuana.
But missing a scheduled test, or the presence of one of several designated diuretics in the urine, also can be counted as a positive test.
Because Henry served a four-week, league-imposed suspension in September 2005 while playing for the Tennessee Titans, he would be facing a yearlong suspension this time. Also, already having been suspended once, he was required to be tested up to 10 times a month for a period of two years; that two-year period was scheduled to be up Oct. 1.
If suspended for a year, Henry would be in "Stage 3" of the league's testing program and he could be tested up to 10 times a month for the remainder of his career.
Henry is the league's second-leading rusher this season, with 498 yards.
legwoldj@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-2359