[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

What additional information? The same additional information the Bruins cited, which others pointed out wasn’t new information? Or the information from his agent which nobody but his agent had confirmed and had actually only been shared after you avoided “jumping” to conclusions?

The additional information is that other credible sources disputed what the Bruins and his agent were saying, which was posted just upthread.

Instead of still trying to make this about how, somehow, everybody else was actually wrong and you were actually right even in your wrongness, you could just accept that your bias put you in a place of defending a racist bully when you shouldn’t have been.

I'll defend anyone against someone who says he should be punished for life over things he did as a child.

Sometimes, when people come to a conclusion faster than you, it isn’t because they rushed, it’s because you moved too slowly. It happens. It might have happened here. But defaulting to you having the right approach even if you were wrong doesn’t make much sense.

So ‘One strike, you're out’ is the correct way to go? He should be in prison, after all? People should be punished for life because Internet randos who have never met them think they're not apologetic enough?

I'll even defend you if anyone says you should lose your career for being a bully, and you're as big a bully as anyone I've met in 17 years on this forum. Sometimes the punishment is excessive for the crime. Some people don't appear to get that.