This is a genuine question.
I have a hard time with this. My righteous side wants him to face an appropriate sentence, but my pessimistic side thinks this might have set a great example for CEOs to always maintain a level of humanity or face unforseen consequences.
P.S. this topic is highly controversial and I want actual opinions so let’s be civil.
And if you’re a mod, delete this if the post is inappropriate or if it gets too heated.
What a weird thing to say. Do you know what they mean? Because it sounds like you don’t.
Human laws are not like… immutable laws of nature. Only a jury can decide if he’s guilty or not, and they can just… say he isn’t.