The Minnesota Vikings have made the decision to reinstate Adrian Peterson for Sunday’s game against the New Orleans Saints and moving forward, until presumably a legal decision is made. The Wilfs released the following statement:
Today’s decision was made after significant thought, discussion and consideration. As evidenced by our decision to deactivate Adrian from yesterday’s game, this is clearly a very important issue. On Friday, we felt it was in the best interests of the organization to step back, evaluate the situation, and not rush to judgment given the seriousness of this matter. At that time, we made the decision that we felt was best for the Vikings and all parties involved.
To be clear, we take very seriously any matter that involves the welfare of a child. At this time, however, we believe this is a matter of due process and we should allow the legal system to proceed so we can come to the most effective conclusions and then determine the appropriate course of action. This is a difficult path to navigate, and our focus is on doing the right thing. Currently we believe we are at a juncture where the most appropriate next step is to allow the judicial process to move forward.
We will continue to monitor the situation closely and support Adrian’s fulfillment of his legal responsibilities throughout this process.
Adrian Peterson’s statement below:
My attorney has asked me not to discuss the facts of my pending case. I hope you can respect that request and help me honor it. I very much want the public to hear from me but I understand that it is not appropriate to talk about the facts in detail at this time. Nevertheless, I want everyone to understand how sorry I feel about the hurt I have brought to my child.
I never wanted to be a distraction to the Vikings organization, the Minnesota community or to my teammates. I never imagined being in a position where the world is judging my parenting skills or calling me a child abuser because of the discipline I administered to my son.
I voluntarily appeared before the grand jury several weeks ago to answer any and all questions they had. Before my grand jury appearance, I was interviewed by two different police agencies without an attorney. In each of these interviews I have said the same thing, and that is that I never ever intended to harm my son. I will say the same thing once I have my day in court.
I have to live with the fact that when I disciplined my son the way I was disciplined as a child, I caused an injury that I never intended or thought would happen. I know that many people disagree with the way I disciplined my child. I also understand after meeting with a psychologist that there are other alternative ways of disciplining a child that may be more appropriate.
I have learned a lot and have had to reevaluate how I discipline my son going forward. But deep in my heart I have always believed I could have been one of those kids that was lost in the streets without the discipline instilled in me by my parents and other relatives. I have always believed that the way my parents disciplined me has a great deal to do with the success I have enjoyed as a man. I love my son and I will continue to become a better parent and learn from any mistakes I ever make.
I am not a perfect son. I am not a perfect husband. I am not a perfect parent, but I am, without a doubt, not a child abuser. I am someone that disciplined his child and did not intend to cause him any injury. No one can understand the hurt that I feel for my son and for the harm I caused him. My goal is always to teach my son right from wrong and that’s what I tried to do that day.
I accept the fact that people feel very strongly about this issue and what they think about my conduct. Regardless of what others think, however, I love my son very much and I will continue to try to become a better father and person.
I am delighted that he met with a psychiatrist and is having discussions about the nature of discipline and even seems open to changing his parental behavior. The long-term effects of even neglectful damaging behavior are worth significant attention and are more than just the success stories.
I think within that statement there’s still cause for concern, but it’s also the reason that a suspension contingent upon completion of parenting courses is a really useful way to go about it. If I understand why he goes back to how he was raised, but there is a dangerous precedent there (it’s what caused the incident in the first place). He also has willingly acknowledged that he will not engage in the kind of discipline that he was subject to, given that he was whipped with electrical cords growing up, and that he wouldn’t do that to his children. There is still some significant negotiation for him to do between what was done to him that was useful and what was not useful.
Still, there isn’t much doubt in my mind that he is a loving father, but injuriously misguided—dangerously so. I’m not so sure intent matters too much in regards to how people should move forward except insofar as he isn’t prosecuted for malicious behavior.
After the statements released by both groups and the activation of Adrian Peterson, Rick Spielman took to the podium:
The presser, in a word, was a disaster. Aside from the fact that Rick Spielman was asked to defend a decision he didn’t make, he still did a poor job. The Wilfs should have been up there, but there was no sense of coherence or continuity from the Vikings. The takeaways are as such:
There are still some confusing takeaways. Spielman acknowledged that the pictures were very disturbing, but could not adequately answer the question of whether or not the team’s moral judgment would be contingent upon a jury’s decision—when asked “Will a jury change what you’ve seen with your eyes,” Spielman responded with “I don’t know, it hasn’t been in front of a jury.”
The Vikings seem rudderless here and in this case, the rudderlessness can be easily interpreted as finding posthoc reasoning for keeping Adrian on the field. That may not necessarily be the case, but if the Vikings think Adrian is a better person than Cook, Jefferson or King—which isn’t actually a difficult case to make—they should say something to that effect.
The distinction between “disciplining a child and going too far” and “abusing a child” (the debate over corporal punishment not withstanding) is one that is being lost—one that deals with the differences between malicious intent and neglectful behavior. The very first question Spielman was asked was about the message it sends to abuse victims, and though that distinction is important in public discussions about Adrian Peterson it is a difficult one to relay in a short presser and perhaps not the best avenue to go—fair or not, there may be a message being sent to abuse victims regardless of the distinction between “going to far” with good intent and malicious intent, and that is the larger question the Vikings needed to address, Spielman in particular.
The historical and larger context of domestic violence and abuse is that far too often, legal recourse seems far away and unlikely, so to defer to a system that many have seen as a failure already creates issues by itself. Further, the Vikings have the information they need, and are deferring their moral judgment to an outside body.
Understandably, due process is an important phrase to keep in mind in most player discipline cases. Untangling the evidence and determining the facts sometimes takes a long time, and it’s important that innocent people not be punished for crimes they didn’t commit. But in this case, there isn’t much new evidence to bring to bear or facts that needed to be unearthed. Peterson, in two separate statements to the police and in a public statement through his lawyer, did the things he is alleged to do. The photos are disturbing, and the doctor who looked at Peterson’s child not only said the marks are consistent with abuse, but consistent with the use of an extension cord.
That’s not to say that Peterson did use an extension cord. I believe him when he says he didn’t. But I think it speaks to the effect of having one of the world’s most powerful athletes using a switch over that of a typical parent or grandparent. We react viscerally to the idea of using an extension cord to discipline a child, and it may be time to consider a similar reaction when the net effect is the same. That the switch curled around and hit not just the child’s back and legs, but also the scrotum and inner thigh is alarming.
In that context, it’s very difficult for observers to credibly expect “due process” to change things. He did what he is said to have done. What has been done is sickening to most observers. He may be well-intentioned, but the Vikings’ message so far is that “what we know isn’t enough,” even though in cases where they knew less and the athletes in question were challenging the facts of the case—Chris Cook, A.J. Jefferson and so on—they decided to move on quickly. Prioritizing the privilege of his ability over the ethics of the act is a disturbing look.
The Vikings did not ask for the indictment from Montgomery County (publicly available through media requests), though the NFL did. Hopefully, the Vikings found a copy of the file through someone else, because of their commitment to due diligence. It sounds like they have. When asked if they did more than speak to Adrian and the attorney, Spielman sidestepped the question. They looked at “the file,” (which we presume to mean the indictment) but they did not answer questions about whether or not they talked to someone besides Adrian.
Usually, I admire Spielman’s ability to say nothing for twelve minutes. It’s an extraordinary skill, especially under fire. Here, it wasn’t appropriate. There is no benefit to avoiding transparency in the process for the Vikings as they deal with a case that cuts at the core values of a society. Spielman refused to discuss when they learned of the case, what new information they said they were working on or how they approached it, only to say it was “different” than with Cook, Jefferson and so on.
And still, it was the Wilfs who made the biggest mistake by not owning their decision and instead trotting out Spielman to do it for them.
Out of the three principal actors today—the Wilfs, Spielman and Adrian—it is surprising that Adrian’s team did a better job. Adrian’s statement speaks to growth and a willingness to learn from his mistakes, as well as owning the fact that he injured his son. It sounds like Adrian has an internal struggle to balance what he has learned about raising children with what ethical standards a society has about this. I hope he resolves everything in a way that best helps the children, and he is at least committed to it.
As for the Vikings, it looks like they were who we thought they were.
View Comments
Great writeup. One edit: "but their is a dangerous precedent" should be "there is a"
Got it. Thanks!
Good read. I think you did a great job pointing out the 'intent' of his actions and not letting it minimalize the effects of his actions. Especially, in light of the charges being negligent/reckless injury. I wonder if abuse is even the correct term. In the subjective sliding moral scale this is certainly less than domestic abuse at the level of Ray Rice.
We'd all like to know how their actions relate to their alleged information gathering weekend. I believe you retweeted that from someone. Is a 1 game deactivation all they feel was appropriate? They've known about this for weeks. Why did they need another couple days to learn more?
Great insight, Arif. What do you think the chances are that the NFL steps in and administers a suspension for AP despite the Vikings' decision to reinstate him today?
That was a very refreshing read Arif.
Yesterday, right after the game, I posted a couple of remarks on one of your threads about AD.
I was way too harsh and I apologize to AD for that.
I do however agree with you when you said "I think within that statement there’s still cause for concern"
When AD said; "I have learned a lot and have had to reevaluate how I discipline my son going forward. But deep in my heart I have always believed I could have been one of those kids that was lost in the streets without the discipline instilled in me by my parents and other relatives. I have always believed that the way my parents disciplined me has a great deal to do with the success I have enjoyed as a man. I love my son and I will continue to become a better parent and learn from any mistakes I ever make."
My first thought was uh-oh. It sounded like he isn't quite convinced that what he did was the wrong way to discipline his son.
I'm pretty sure though that after a little time passes and he has more time for input from others and time to dwell on this, he'll come around and realize what he did was wrong and not make that mistake again.
(And hopefully he'll rush for 200 yards next Sunday)
I have no issues with you Arif, I just disagree. Facts are facts, but the time to make the decision to release AD was not 6-8 hours after this became knowledge. That's knee jerk..usually not a smart move. It's like me after a Viking loss...some things I say within a couple hours is usually an overreaction.
I just didn't like the "release him now" crowd ranting and raving, that seemed to be popular just hours after. It was an overreaction, plain and simple. The Vikings did the right thing. IMO.
AD is not a better person than those other guys, he's a better player. it's normal that he isn't treated the same.
Everyone has their opinion on this. Right or wrong, the Vikings one is all that matter right now.
I'm very disappointed the team went with the due process argument for reinstating him, even more disappointed after reading the statement from Adrian's team which highlighted a need for Adrian to grow as a parent from this. That is the only angle the team should be using as a reason to re-instate him and if Adrian was agreeable to it, why in the World did they put the ball back in the legal systems court? I would find it much easier to stand behind the team on this if their focus was to provide Adrian a support system and educate him to a level that would maybe one day put him in a position to become a key figure in the fight against child abuse. Wouldn't that have been a great way for Spielman to answer the question regarding what this move tells victims of abuse? That actually makes sense to me, but instead they are hiding behind due process which I firmly agree does not apply in this case. We know what he did, intent or not, he badly hurt that child. Adrian himself does not dispute the facts and whether what he did falls under the state of Texas' definition of child endangerment doesn't really matter at this moment. The team is in a lose lose position with this, but they sure didn't do themselves any favors with how this was handled. And your darn right they should just come out and say that Adrian Peterson has been a better role model in this community than guys like Cook/Jefferson/and King ever were and because of that deserves a second chance...and a big part of that would entail him being willing to educate people on this topic. They just made it look like the only thing they care about is getting him back on the field Sunday and that can't be in a case like this.
What's Adrian's cap % ?
He's a top 10 player in the league, not Chris Cook, sorry how it is, just is..
Just heard a report that AD has been charged with a second abuse charge against another of boys.
http://www.dailynorseman.com/2014/9/15/6154941/report-adrian-peterson-under-investigation-for-second-abuse-allegation
Also, just went to check another Viking forum I have been a member of since 2006 and found this;
Shut down
Vikings Message Board has been shut down permanently. It will not return. There are two primary reasons.
1. The Vikings cowardly decision to reinstate a child abuser and think that an apology will make this blow over. We will not stand for this arrogance and we will no longer be the home of any support of the Vikings. We stand for those who cannot defend themselves.
2. We will not give a voice to thugs who think child abuse is "cultural" or worse, openly advocate child abuse as a reasonable method of punishment. This ends here. Yes, a few board members have ruined it for everyone. Congratulations, assholes.
WOW!
Wow is right Fran...shut down the whole thing huh? Hope Adam doesn't go that route.
That would suck.
I was stunned. That was a REAL good Viking forum (Not as good as VT, of course :)
Sounds like some sponsors are following that lead. I wonder what they thought the reaction would be.
The NFL is a business. Many people, myself included, tend to get carried away at times and overstate the role and relevance of sports (particularly football) in our culture. Yes, it's popular, and yes, people wrongly pedestalize professional athletes, forgetting that running really fast with a football doesn't make you a hero or a paragon of virtue. However, at the end of the day, it is a business that provides a product for which there is tremendous demand. Their bottom line is the bottom line. We can think whatever we want about AP, Greg Hardy, Ray Rice, etc., but after all the head shaking and hand wringing is done, the only thing that really matters is whether or not we still want the product that's being offered.
Would you like a great on-field product as well as a company (the NFL) that promotes every cause you believe in and takes a strong moral stance against all of society's ills, even when it hurts them? Sure. But if they turn out to be a company providing a great on-field product while worrying more about their finances than anything else, will you still watch the games? I think most people will. The NFL is no better or worse than the NBA, MLB, NHL, McDonalds, Target, Wal-Mart, Microsoft, GE, Apple, Google, AT&T, etc. etc. Companies exist to make money. Most people ether freely or grudgingly accept that.
If you want to change the way the NFL (or a team) does business, you have to get enough people on you side that you begin affecting their revenue. As I'm sure we've all noticed, not everyone sees this issue the same way, not by a long shot. Darren Page absolutely nailed it earlier today when he tweeted "Think of PR storm on 1-10 scale. When indicted, it was basically 10. So Minnesota deactivates, drops to like a 4. Reinstates, it's a 5 or 6." and "If they let him play Sunday, it's still probably an 8 or 9. That's how these decisions are made." There you have it, kids. What you call immoral, others call good business. Unless the majority of paying customers begin to despise the decision making enough to stop buying the product, nothing will change. I guess we'll see which way the crowd decides to go.
Good comment Ulberht.
Absolutely! Lots of hypocrisy here. Not a double standard on a team, but 63 standards, and by the way, why don't more people go over to the poor countries and protect the abused over there?
Yes it is a business. So is the sex trade where children are kidnapped and raped for profit. There must be a higher moral road we take besides shaking our heads sadly and then downing a cold one as we watch the next debacle of a game. Have we as a sports culture sunk this low? I hope not. I hope a storm erupts that shocks the owners to the core. I hope Adrian is held accountable by the league he once accused of enslaving him.
Sex trade? WTF...you serious?
Arid I appreciate your intent of objectivity with this issue and taking the middle road. I'll be honest in saying I'm very surprised that the Vikings ownership took the low road in this. Whatever Peterson has done for the team or community does not eliminate what he has done in injuring a four year old child. He is not being held accountable for a very public display of violence which he does not deny but justifies by claiming to follow past traditions. Minnesota is not Texas. In a progressive state such as this is, I do not believe the Wilf's fully realize the fuel they just threw on the fire by hoping Rick Speak would dampen the flames of anger ready to erupt. Many are shocked and angry and incensed that our favorite team would look the other way when the star player has beat and wounded a four year old boy. This was purely a financial decision and I hope it backfires because it is simply wrong.
It's a witchhunt.. Thanks ESPN