I only just caught the second-last episode on Hulu today. So felony vandalism is enough to get his parole revoked but strangling a patient isn't? Seriously?
It seems to me that clogging up a toilet could have had such a severe consequences to the hospital's entire plumbing system. I mean it's a good thing no-one ever had a bad-night of Mexican food the whole hospital might have flooded. I mean one stopped-up toilet had that much of an effect on the hospital's plumbing? On strangling the patient? I suppose that might go to the family's response to it (it did force the POTW to change his mind and to get treatment) and it may have been chalked up to an emotional outburst from House dealing with his friend dying. But charging him with felony vandalism for stopping up a toilet seems extreme considering it's not his fault the hospital's plumbing sucks so much that apparently a wad of wet paper causes pipes to burst.
Foreman indicated that he had been able to cover up such incidents in the past (keeping them from the authorities) and that he was unable to do so in this case.
He was only unable to do so because the emergency responders reported their findings to the police. I'm sure if he could have Foreman would have tried to keep House out of trouble.
You're totally missing the point. He almost murdered a patient while the patient's mother was looking on. And there were absolutely zero consequences for it. Even if that hadn't gotten him immediately arrested, it was evidence that he was psychologically disturbed and a danger to himself and others. Foreman wouldn't have covered that up; he would've had House institutionalized again at the very least. Heck, even if Foreman would've covered it up, even if the mother and the patient could've somehow been persuaded not to press charges or even report the crime, there should've at least been an acknowledgment that the event had happened at all. It should've warranted serious and heated discussion and an explanation of why it had no consequences. Instead, they just showed it and forgot about it from then on, and that's just sloppy writing.
^Reminds me of CSI:NY a few months ago, where a man with a chain saw terrorized a sidewalk full of people, then cut down a tree that a bike was chained to and stole the bike. The plot then completely disregarded the guy with the chainsaw because the case was about the bike owner who (IIRC) got killed because he couldn't escape the guy that was chasing him without his bike. I spent the whole episode screaming WHAT ABOUT THE GUY WITH THE CHAINSAW? WASN'T THAT A CRIME?!?!
Your point wasn't clear. I responded to why one action led to a revoked parole and one action did not. It is clear that Foreman would rather neither action led to serious consequences. We can come up with various motivations for Foreman (loyalty, confused ethics from years of working with House, a desire to keep his job, etc.), but Foreman made his bed with House way back at the beginning of the season. He let House come back to the hospital despite House ramming a car into Cuddy's home while knowing that a little child could be wandering under the window. Everything since then has just been an extension of that decision.