What's right? Smith vs. St. Jean

[OldGreyEagle 5]

I am so confused!

 

The Where: BSA National Headquarters

 

The What: Seems to be that possesion of Kiddie Porn instantly equals a guilty party

 

The When: is that the BSA should have fired Smith after they learned of the investigation but before any legal charges were made.

 

Now, it has happened that possesion of Kiddie Porn is not always treated as a criminal act and if BSA fired an employee before all the facts were in, it still would have been a PR fiasco.

 

The Who? Pete Townsend You Better, You better, you bet(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[evmori 11]

OGE,

You gotta be kidding! Sure Pete did the same thing, I think. But if I'm not mistaken, his crime occurred in England.

 

Smith was in charge of YP for the Boy Scouts of America & the purveyor of kiddie porn on the side. Notice any sort of conflict there?

 

Are you suggesting what Smith did was OK & should be overlooked?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[FScouter 24]

You'd think from comments here that he was given a promotion, a raise, and a big bonus. He could have been tarred and feathered on the spot and still there would be those bellyaching that BSA didn't do enough soon enough.

[OldGreyEagle 5]

as Ed often says

 

The humor impaired have arrived!(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)