You be the judge
Thieves planned to steal from Four Winds.
They went out to Four Winds in Sue's dinghy.
CASE 1   CASE 2
This didn't happen but could have.   This is what did happen.
Sue decided to go to Four Winds.
Sue went to RYCT.
Found dinghy stolen.
  Sue decided NOT to go to Four Winds.
Pitch dark. Sue never went to RYCT.
Unaware dinghy stolen.
Called police who came to scene.    
Mr Hughes made a statement.
Dim blur of person seen in a dinghy.
= Mr Hughes made a statement.
Sue seen in her dinghy.
Police could do nothing at night.
   
Sue went home.
At daybreak, dinghy was found.
Four Winds crime scene unfolded.
Sue was not a suspect.
Supported by police
who had come at her call.
  Sue was the sole suspect.
Brought to trial on
circumstantial evidence.
Sue declared innocent.   Sue found guilty.


Question: Where do these two Cases really differ?
Answer: Sue went to the RYCT in (1) but not in (2).

Home