This is dangerous territory. Fogle was never charged with actual physical contact with minors. What the author here is evidently relying upon is that his Internet presence is that of a fruit loop; thus, nobody would bother to sue for defamation. But on the elements of that tort, Fogle may very well have a case, if he so chose.
I have to correct myself, so the yoke’s on me I guess.
I thought the guy was charged with possession of child porn, but he was actually charged with child porn plus some sort of conspiracy-related charge regarding the production of child porn by another criminal; plus he was additionally charged with at least one instance of sex with a minor in the PLaza hotel in New York City (the girl was 17); plus there was also talk from prosecutors of Fogle using his Subway-related business trips for sex with more minors, but I’m not sure these later instances made it into the indictment.
But in any case, I was wrong.