Quote:
Originally Posted by Exitonly
that's pretty cold clayton. no one said they owed it, just that id' be a nice gesture/good PR move. which sounds right considering the massive attention this is getting. (Yahoo front page and fark? jesus so many hitsssss)
|
it would obviously be a good PR move if the public reaction deemed it, but I get the vibe that any payment made to JP somehow, in some way, admits some blame in the crime taking place. If there is anyone at fault, it is JP and the state for the rate of crime.
now, all of this is made on the assumption JP wasnt on casino property.
now, if they re-imburse JP because "it will better our image", so long as thats on the table then I think thats cool
but i think im nitpicking over an insignificant issue.