Uhhh, yeah it does have something to do with playing "internet lawyer", at least what you bought up.
I don't need to read the internet to know what you are talking about here, I have been involved in such cases about 100 different times over the last 20 years as a person held responsible for employees actions. The "respondeat superior" thing is also called different things in different states.
Cartman, the concept of "respondeat superior" you bought up applies while performing expected work duties during the course of normal employment times (for simple example, an employee has a traffic accident and does property damage or injury while using a company vehicle and during work hours while in the course of his/her normal expected duties). It does not extend outside those duties of employment (or "work place") except in certain cases for certain "career fields" such as police, military, medical, etc... those things where there is a legal obligation towards society of some sort by virtue of training and (or) unique expertise. All 50 states hold their state government employees responsible 24 hours a day, and for the U.S. government an employee is responsible 24 hours a day.
Clearly (if things are as alleged in the complaint) Hague was not performing normal expected work duties and what the alleged offenses are were performed by him intentionally discarding the obligation of duty and abusing his position of trust. "respondeat superior" also does not apply for crimes or intentional violations of law because these are not considered in the scope of employment duties.
Because it appears on wikipedia or the internet does not mean it applies simply because it seems to apply.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
