I hadn't read the thread but did now and I saw the posts in question. It's true that a couple of the posters there did seem to rush to defend him and/or imagine stories of revenge or excuse the act as a mistake because "maybe they looked older."Srey Bourque wrote: ↑Thu Sep 23, 2021 2:21 am
There was actually a thread on CEO three days ago about McMahan being arrested/accused/summoned relating to a child sex crime, but GONK got bullied into changing the title by McMahan's friends, who were arguing (and I'm not making this up) that it was unfair to say he was accused of child sex because he was just "Helping the Police with their Enquiries."
Posts on CEO disagreeing with McMahan's friends that he was set up and/or that he was just "helping" police were predictably censored and deleted.
They're really circling the wagons for McMahan over there, saying these allegations sound like a "revenge act" by one of the boys, and that maybe he "thought they were 18," or that maybe a business partner is fabricating the allegations to try to take over McMahan's possibly non-existent ownership share in this crappy hotel that can't possibly be making any money.
That being said, it's hardly a representation of CEO what a couple of the nonces friends have been posting. I see the reasoning that the thread title was initially changed.
Just as CEO isn't represented by the posts of the nonces defenders, I don't consider Khmer440 to be entirely represented by the posts of Fred Edwards.