- May 21, 2026
- 0
- 0
A week after the judge presiding over the criminal case involving Packers running back Josh Jacobs signed an order temporarily sealing the evidence (including a video of the altercation that prompted a misdemeanor battery charge), the judge declined to sign an order that would have sealed the evidence permanently.
Via Fox 11, the judge rejected a proposed order on procedural grounds, concluding it was in an "improper format."
A hearing on the issue has been set for next Thursday. At that point, the judge could decide to grant the request, made by the victim's lawyer, to permanently seal the evidence.
The NFL wants to see the video, as part of the effort to determine the proper discipline to be imposed on Jacobs under the Personal Conduct Policy. The league's inability to get access to the video underscores the flaws in its in-house justice system.
The NFL doesn't have the power that a court of law possesses. It can't compel witnesses to cooperate. It can't subpoena records. It possibly will be stymied by a court order blocking access to important evidence.
The league should nevertheless attempt to secure the ability to review the video, subject to the requirement of a protective order. It's possible to balance the victim's privacy rights with the NFL's desire to ensure that it has the ability to effectively and accurately assess a proper penalty on Jacobs.
Jacobs remains on paid leave while the NFL considers the proper suspension to be imposed.
Via Fox 11, the judge rejected a proposed order on procedural grounds, concluding it was in an "improper format."
A hearing on the issue has been set for next Thursday. At that point, the judge could decide to grant the request, made by the victim's lawyer, to permanently seal the evidence.
The NFL wants to see the video, as part of the effort to determine the proper discipline to be imposed on Jacobs under the Personal Conduct Policy. The league's inability to get access to the video underscores the flaws in its in-house justice system.
The NFL doesn't have the power that a court of law possesses. It can't compel witnesses to cooperate. It can't subpoena records. It possibly will be stymied by a court order blocking access to important evidence.
The league should nevertheless attempt to secure the ability to review the video, subject to the requirement of a protective order. It's possible to balance the victim's privacy rights with the NFL's desire to ensure that it has the ability to effectively and accurately assess a proper penalty on Jacobs.
Jacobs remains on paid leave while the NFL considers the proper suspension to be imposed.