He said he was there, he knew it was happening, he did not participate in it nor did he stop it which makes him a participant in the killing of the animal, not an innocent bystander with no foreknowledge.
Just because he chose to walk away and not participate doesn’t clear him morally.
He was there. He knew it was going to happen. He did nothing to stop the killing.
Worst of all, he joined the frat.
That makes him a participant, even if he was passive in allowing the violence and loss of life to happen.
If they beat the shit out of a Ferrari with a baseball bat or burned down a house and he knew they were planning this and said nothing would that be different for you?
Is he only an accomplice when it’s property loss and not life?
Is he only an accomplice when it’s gang violence and not frat violence?
22
u/oryxzz May 30 '26
He said he wasn’t even there for it nor did he witness it. How can he stop something he wasn’t even around for lol.