I’m trying to make sense of the most recent sentences handed down by University of Tennessee football coach/judge Phillip Fulmer. It’s going to take awhile.

That’s not meant as criticism.

If full-time judges can’t get it right, how can you expect Fulmer to be an expert on matching punishment with crimes? He doesn’t even have a law degree.

He does have practice. In fact, due to the recent criminal activities of his players, he has progressed to the point where he can rule on two cases in one day. Judge Judy would be impressed.

First, let’s take the case of Marsalous Johnson, the alleged toy-wielding gunman who has been accused of pointing his weapon of choice at an off-duty deputy from Putman County while they were driving along I-40 in separate cars. Johnson, a redshirt freshman defensive back, was charged with aggravated assault.

Fulmer’s ruling: Johnson will be suspended for the first four games. He also will have to move back into the dorm, return his car to his home and perform 50 hours of community service.

I assume he also will be required to turn in his toy Uzi, but that wasn’t mentioned in the press release.

My take: Just call me a "hanging judge," but I wouldn’t have hesitated kicking Johnson off the team. You aren’t just sentencing a player, you’re trying to send a message to your team that the crimes of the past will no longer be tolerated.

Of course, you could argue there’s no crime of the past involving a UT football player and a toy gun.

For consideration: The press release quotes Fulmer as saying Johnson has been suspended for the first four games "regardless of the outcome of his court appearance." So the sentence seems open-ended.

If Johnson is later convicted of the crime, Fulmer still could kick him off the team.

Fulmer’s second case involved incoming freshman tight end Lee Smith, who was arrested for an early-morning drive on campus while under the influence of alcohol.

Fulmer’s ruling: Dismissal.

My take: Call me "surprised," but I expected Smith would be suspended for his freshman year during which he would have been redshirted anyway. The sentence is hardly indicative of a lenient judge.

For consideration: Smith also was in the news last week. And that news wasn’t good, either.

His possible involvement in a sex and grade-fixing scandal at Powell High School brought further embarrassment to a UT program that can’t seem to stay out of trouble.

Fulmer can’t keep his players from getting into trouble. But he can take strong action when they do. In these cases, he did.

Sure, a four-game suspension for Johnson is light, but he still could be dismissed from the team if found guilty as charged.

In his more-lenient days, Fulmer might have said "we’ll wait for the legal process to run its course" before making a decision on discipline. Instead, he found enough evidence to justify taking some disciplinary action but not enough evidence — at this point — to dismiss Johnson.

In past years, it’s highly unlikely Fulmer would have kicked Smith off the team. For example, consider UT punter Britton Colquitt.

In 2003, Colquitt had four alcohol-related charges filed against him in three different incidents, and another incident the next year. He was suspended in March of 2004 and redshirted the following season, so he never lost any eligibility.

Two years later, after one alcohol-related offense, Smith has lost his scholarship.

Obviously, Fulmer isn’t as soft on crime as he used to be. But neither Smith nor Johnson figured prominently in UT’s plans this season. If Fulmer really wants to prove himself as a disciplinarian, he will need to do it with a starter.

The way things are going, he won’t have to wait long for the opportunity.

Sports editor John Adams may be reached at 865-342-6284 or adamsj@knews.com.