Bushtuckerman:

I tend to be somewhat of a cynic (Ask Norad45, Joblot, and note the deleted posts with my name.) and therefore tend to be more suspicious of people (Norad45 & Joblot please note that politicians, rich people, police, any power structure, and spinmiesters are not the only ones I rail against.). That being the case, I always approach a situation by distrusting statements and looking at actions or the results they produce.

I would definitely look into Joe's background after hearing his explanation and then decide. Yes, I know innocent people are accused every day by mistake and by vindictive others, and you are still innocent until proven guilty, but the criminally minded will always attempt to use a situation to their advantage.

The other thing to consider is that there are posters on web sites that work for attornies, political parties, big business, organized crime (Supposedly different from big business.), and poll takers who look to see what kind of reactions a given situation will generate among the people at large or certain groups. If I was an attorney defending someone, wheather totally innocent or totally guilty, this forum, hunting, camping, hiking, and survival sites would be the best way to gage reactions to Joe's case.

Many people have told me being suspicious tends to be a downer, but I always believe if you start negative, and the majority of people being good, you will come up wrong and end up postive as opposed to being positive and having your faith shattered when further research shows you were being treated like a mushroom.

Bountyhunter <img src="/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />