3194: NOT GUILTY
In CFJ 3018:
* The severity of the inaction was low. (The unlabeled text was
clearly evidence in context.)
* There was no evidence that the defendant hadn't thought about the
implications of eir inaction.
* Thus, it was reasonable to assume that e had thought about it.
In this case:
* The severity of the inaction is higher. (The case was not
obviously IRRELEVANT or FALSE, and e didn't explicitly state
whether e had any real evidence either way. Granted, the judge of
such a case can just respond "UNDETERMINED, come back when you've
done your homework", but that's still extra work for em.)
* E admitted that e hadn't thought about the implications. (E has
not denied the IRC conversation, despite having had ample time and
opportunity to do so. In said conversation, e didn't even address
the possibility of being prosecuted until ais523 asked whether e had
thought about things.)
GUILTY / APOLOGY (destroy, is, such, an, ugly, word)
