Reply #182: that's why...

[pipi_k]

both sides in a legal action get a chance to present their sides.

Because courts, at least, recognize that people have a tendency to see and hear things that might not have happened. Or that happened a different way.

I would imagine that anyone here would probably be outraged (OUTRAGED!!!) at all the times someone has been convicted based purely on eyewitness testimony.

Six people can see the same event and come away with just as many interpretations of that one event.


So here we have a secondhand retelling of an incident. Not even the original neighbor's words, but words heard, and interpreted by, the OP. Which isn't to say the OP is wrong...just that retellings sometimes change with no malice intended.

We don't even have the words of the young man himself here. WHY he stole those groceries.

What would he say? I have no idea, frankly.

Yet some here have decided once and for all that without a doubt he's starving and supporting a family of 15 who would all die if he didn't steal. With NO evidence whatsoever. Just secondhand information.

Amazing. Well, all I can say is that sometimes being flamed to crispiness is a sign that you have hit a nerve somewhere.

:7