Bell: Goodell must explain himself at Rice hearing

If NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has been above board throughout the sequence of events stemming from the Ray Rice domestic assault situation, he should embrace the directive from U.S. District Judge Barbara S. Jones to testify during one of the most scrutinized appeals hearings in league history.

And with longtime NFL nemesis Jeffrey Kessler — whose zeal for battling the league on behalf of the NFL Players Association goes at least as far back as the big antitrust suit that changed the NFL system in the early 1990s — in the mix as an interrogator, there's a horror flick element added to the drama for the commissioner.

But at least Goodell can try to set the record straight.

Goodell has maintained Rice's description of the attack during a meeting at NFL headquarters on June 16 was inconsistent with images revealed with TMZ's release of the inside-the-elevator video that captured the NFL running back flooring his now-wife and then-fiancée, Janay Palmer, with a left hook that left her unconscious. A recent report by ESPN's Outside The Lines, though, citing unnamed sources, contends Rice was truthful with the commissioner.

With no recording or transcript of their meeting, Jones, the neutral arbiter agreed upon by both sides, could be left to determine which version of the meeting is more credible.

NFL DRAFT HUB: Latest NFL Draft mock drafts, news, live picks, grades and analysis.

Another crucial layer will exist with the boundaries Jones sets for what specific questioning is allowed as relevant to this case.

Yet the foundation of Rice's appeal, expected to be heard Nov. 5-6, is still the issue of double jeopardy.

Rice (whose personal attorney, Peter Ginsberg, squared off against Goodell and the NFL on behalf of Jonathan Vilma in the New Orleans Saints bounty scandal) maintains he's been punished twice for the same heinous infraction.

As disgusting as it was to see the inside-the-elevator video, Goodell went out of bounds in superseding his originally weak two-game suspension with an indefinite suspension after TMZ's release of the video in early September set off a second tidal wave of public outrage.

That reeks of double jeopardy, which is not only a fundamental principle addressed in the U.S. legal system but is also spoken for in the NFL's collective bargaining agreement.

Goodell and the Baltimore Ravens, who cut Rice hours after TMZ's video went viral, maintain conditions of Rice's case changed with the images.

Even so, it was the same brutal assault.

That Goodell and the Ravens didn't react as forcibly before the outrage kicked in, and they apparently didn't secure the videotape, isn't a good enough defense.

The police report from the February incident at the Revel Casino in Atlantic City maintains Rice admitted striking his wife.

That Goodell — whose pattern for weak discipline in domestic assault cases was documented in a recent analysis by USA TODAY Sports — didn't grasp the severity of that in the months after the attack doesn't make it right to inflict pile-on punishment.

Besides, what happened to the six-game punishment that is supposed to be a standard under terms of the new domestic violence policy?

Although Rice committed the assault (which alarmingly resulted in pre-trial diversion), it's Goodell who's on trial.

There seems to be more risk in play than reward. No doubt, the benefits can still be substantial for Goodell if the hearing, combined with findings from the Robert Mueller investigation, confirm his version of events with his credibility hanging in the balance.

But widespread support voiced by NFL owners, his bosses, could waver with new revelations. The players union's case for a joint panel to determine player discipline can be strengthened. And even if everything Goodell has stated publicly to this point pans out, it does not erase the questions about his competence in handling that particular crisis.

The Rice hearing could also provide a glimpse of how some situations in the NFL are handled with side meetings and off-the-record conversations.

If such preliminary meetings were recorded and transcribed, they would essentially become appeals hearings.

Which is where it stands now with Rice's case illuminating a vast gray area.

Follow NFL columnist Jarrett Bell on Twitter @JarrettBell.