I apparently failed to make my point from the angle I attempted to express. Your response feels like words in my mouth that I never intended.
I think to a degree, yes. Establish a time to measure the situation and 'rule' on that. Resolve and get some closure out of fairness. I never wanted DW to avoid punishment or suspension when found wrong. My point was that the women, the player, this team, and the Browns franchise need some closure to function and that shouldn't be worsened by the NFL's handling. Even crime in the real world has some statutes of limitations. It is fair to know a starter, to know your roster needs, and have some framework for whatever discipline is hands down because it affects many people. I am suggesting if you manage this and finalize that much fine. Everybody knows what going forward will look like. That closure offers a chance for rationale and for clarification. You gain by having a precedent functionally in place. If more comes up needing further attention, investigation, discipline, consequence, or clarification, do that then.
I personally find your question unfair about do I ignore what is happening as it is ongoing. If that is your suggestion pretending to be an argument that it is the direction I want, it is not. But the flip side is unfair and unworkable IMO. How long is long enough? How long does a player and franchise wait before the NFL executes the duty it has reserved entirely unto itself? Even a common criminal can get some time served while waiting. Draw some lines in the dirt as needed and take some of the media noise out of this. Or state we will wait a few years on the off chance something else might come in or someone else come forward. If they do, then act as needed in timely fashion, always in an attempt to realize closure and direction.
I will try to be clearer. Kind of tired of this process; it invites attacks, fair or not. This situation is causing damage to this team beyond DW's actions before joining the Browns.
| 
