Earlier this week, Brown County Circuit Judge Marc Hammer denied a proposed motion from the victim’s attorney that would have permanently sealed evidence from the case. The packet of materials in question includes surveillance video captured during the May incident involving the running back’s then-girlfriend. The motion to seal was filed on September 15 under Wisconsin’s Marsy’s Law, which is intended to protect victims’ rights and privacy. The judge’s ruling did not grant the seal, but it also did not automatically release the materials to the public. The court noted that the proposed order was not properly formatted, and the victim’s attorneys were given the opportunity to resubmit. A status conference is scheduled for September 24 to address the matter further.
This procedural wrinkle matters because the NFL is seeking access to the surveillance footage as part of its own investigation under the Personal Conduct Policy. League insiders have indicated that obtaining video and interviewing involved individuals could be pivotal to determining any disciplinary action.
In late September, the running back pleaded no contest to misdemeanor battery and criminal damage to property charges arising from the May incident. He received a $1,000 fine for the battery conviction, while the property-damage charge was resolved through a deferred judgment agreement. The deferred portion requires counseling, restitution, a no-contact order with the victim, and a commitment to avoid further legal trouble. Despite the criminal resolution, the NFL’s review remains ongoing, underscoring the league’s independent standards and processes that operate separately from state court outcomes.
An NFL spokesperson emphasized that the team’s status under the Personal Conduct Policy remains unchanged. The running back has been on the Commissioner’s Exempt List since late August, which prevents him from practicing or playing while the league completes its review. Players on this list continue to receive their salaries, and any games missed during this period can be counted toward a potential suspension, depending on the outcome of the league’s inquiry.
The ongoing dispute over access to the surveillance footage could become a significant factor. The footage reportedly documents an argument at the player’s home and allegedly shows him taking a physical action against the involved party. The victim’s attorneys have argued for continued sealing to protect privacy and emotional well-being, arguing that public release could cause unnecessary harm. Lower court rulings and motions around this request will shape how the NFL can proceed in obtaining documentation that could influence its disciplinary decision.
For the Green Bay Packers, the situation carries tangible implications. The team has relied heavily on the running back since acquiring him in 2024. In his first season with Green Bay, he amassed 1,329 rushing yards and 15 rushing touchdowns. He followed that with 929 rushing yards and 13 rushing touchdowns over 15 games in the subsequent season. Across two seasons, he has totaled 2,258 rushing yards, 28 rushing touchdowns, and added 72 receptions for 624 receiving yards with two more scores. His production forms a substantial portion of Green Bay’s offensive output, and his potential absence has forced the team to explore alternatives.
In the wake of the legal proceedings, Green Bay has turned to other backs to fill the workload. The Packers acquired MarShawn Lloyd, Chris Brooks, and Kaleb Johnson from Pittsburgh, sending a 2028 sixth-round pick to the Steelers as part of the package. Those players provide depth and an option to maintain the team’s rushing attack if the running back remains unavailable as the legal process unfolds.
The timeline for a definitive return remains unclear. The court’s upcoming session on September 24 could yield further guidance on whether additional materials will be released or sealed, and whether the NFL will gain access to the video before it makes any formal disciplinary determinations. Until then, the league’s review proceeds independently, and the team continues to prepare for assignments with or without the star back.
As this situation develops, the overarching dynamic is that state-level proceedings and league-level governance operate with distinct objectives. The state system focuses on criminal matters and evidence under the Marsy’s Law framework, while the NFL’s Personal Conduct Policy evaluates professional conduct and league standards, potentially resulting in suspensions or other penalties independent of court outcomes.
Fans and analysts will be watching to see if the surveillance footage, once evaluated within the NFL’s framework, influences a decisive outcome. The next milestones hinge on court proceedings on September 24 and any subsequent rulings regarding the sealing of materials. Meanwhile, the Packers’ depth chart will continue to adapt, ensuring the team remains competitive while navigating the uncertainties around their star running back’s status.
