In booger eating law, there is no presumption of innocence.I don't see what the big deal is. I have to agree with the harblow brothers.
There is no evidence that he actually ate the booger. First, I don't think it was for certain a booger. To me a booger contains at least a small amount of gooey snot and I just didn't see that. He clearly only got a little crust with his dig.
Now the question becomes, did he swallow the crust? I don't think he did. I think he just chewed on it for a while and spit it out.
So basically jimmy is a spitter. I know I know most on here would have bet he was a swallower, but there is not enough proof.
Upvote
0