Say someone worked for a very long time for a company. Say this person committed a big crime while at this company. Then say this person is now trying to collect their pension saying that they are still owed that money no matter what they had done… Before I tell you who that person is specifically, try to form an opinion based on just the vague facts.
Slacker keeps pointing out that this person fulfilled his duties to the company and if you look at it just like that, he is owed the money. So even though he has an opinion on this person, Slacker is trying to look at what this person earned while working there.
And the person is…Jerry Sandusky! Does your opinion change?
Do you think he deserves his pension?
I was totally against this and thinking no way in hell should he get this money at first. The only thing that is making me second guess this at all is when Slacker asked if his family deserves this money. He’s clearly going to spend the rest of his life in prison, but his family didn’t commit those crimes and they may be counting on it. I think that I’m still leaning more towards him and the family not deserving it. He should have thought about all that before he did what he did.
(photo courtesy of freedigitalphotos.net)