By Ferd Lewis
Advertiser Columnist

That Allen Iverson spent the hours before yesterday's arraignment throwing himself an all-night party on his palatial estate shouldn't have come as much of a surprise.

Like, maybe, you expected deep contemplation or, perhaps, a low profile?

The reality is that Iverson knows, as we all should by now, that no matter what happens on his drive through the justice system the surprise will be if he isn't back playing in the NBA before Mark Cuban hits the $100,000 mark in fines.

The real wonder will be if he isn't in a Philadelphia 76ers uniform taking 40 shots a night again before Thanksgiving.

We make no prejudgment of the pending charges because Iverson remains innocent until proven guilty. If he is innocent of the charges, he will be back, except for practices, of course, whenever he wants to be.

And even in the event he is found guilty of any of the 14 charges — four felony and 10 misdemeanor, Iverson will be back on the court faster than you can say NBA Properties, for whom his No. 3 jersey is a top money-maker.

At worst, Iverson might miss a paycheck. Not that, between a $12.5 million-a-year Philadelphia 76ers contract and the additional millions Reebok and Sega are forking over, he would feel even a pinch.

We know this because Iverson is a star among star athletes and that is how we deal with them, if we bother to admonish them at all.

Iverson learned this fact of life a long time ago, probably before he perfected the 3-point shot, and it has helped shape his behavior, in and out of uniform, ever since.

He came to understand, from coaches who let him slide on even routine responsibilities, a governor who granted clemency and a commissioner who has slapped his wrist, that as long as his athletic talents separate him from 99 percent of mortals, he has considerably more latitude, too. That when he was called to answer for his actions at all, it would be to a vastly different standard than the people who pay to watch him play.

In theory, NBA Commission David Stern can fine and suspend a player for "conduct detrimental to the league" with or without a conviction. But, really, how often has that happened even with some pretty egregious acts among players?

The league, for all its public service announcements, has been slow to invoke the conduct clause particularly in cases of domestic abuse and firearms offenses. Nor does it seem likely to change if it involved one of the league's top attractions.

As Iverson reminds us, the threat of sanctions isn't anything to be concerned about. Certainly it is nothing to stand in the way of a party.