Opinion > Letters
Can anyone help 'clear up confusion?'
I am confused! If I was being wrongfully accused of taking something not mine, be it money or whatever, I don't think I would be trying to give it back to the owner. That would go against the grain, to give something back that I didn't take. That, regardless of what an attorney says, sounds like guilt to me.
So here is why I am confused. Why would a person offer to give something back, if they didn't take it in the first place? And why would an attorney not advise their client of how that looks? Why not let a jury decide if I took these things or not? And then, if they decided I did take these items, they could order me to return or pay restitution.
Mind you, I'm not an attorney. But that would make more sense to me, rather than offer to give back something I hadn't taken. So, if anyone can clear this confusion up for me I would be grateful.
Rina Snoots
Mescal
So here is why I am confused. Why would a person offer to give something back, if they didn't take it in the first place? And why would an attorney not advise their client of how that looks? Why not let a jury decide if I took these things or not? And then, if they decided I did take these items, they could order me to return or pay restitution.
Mind you, I'm not an attorney. But that would make more sense to me, rather than offer to give back something I hadn't taken. So, if anyone can clear this confusion up for me I would be grateful.
Rina Snoots
Mescal
Copyright © 2012 - San Pedro Valley News-Sun