that's funny how you mention that trout is just a regular guy who made a "regular" mistake. that's incorrect, im a regular guy and i've never gotten into a drunken fistfight in a restaurant. that's actually extremely childish and can cause a lot of property damage.
you say you arent talking about trout, but why bring it up then? the whole trusting a criminal thing.
trout is no criminal, i dont think he did it and hes never been in trouble for anything else. even if he did do it hes not a criminal, almost everyone breaks the law at some point but you have to take into account in which way.
i wouldnt trust someone who got drunk in public or got into a streetfight any less than i did before. im not saying its okey im just saying its an understandable mistake and we all make mistakes. you act as if he got caught smuggling illegal firearms across the border.
so guilty or not hes not really a criminal, he would simply be a regular guy who made a regular mistake. but i dont think he was guilty. you are naive if you think you can blindly trust the cops, i will take a civilians word over a cops any day. a criminals? no. but trout isnt a criminal
a cop claimed he smelled alcohol on his breath but when trout asked for a breathalyzer he refused. witnesses are the least trustworthy evidence there is. they claimed trout was part of it, trout claims he was only breaking it up.
if he indeed was breaking up the fight the witnesses could easily think he was part of it and like mentioned they get things wrong very often. the cop could be wrong too and the fact that he refused trout a breathalyzer makes me question his judgement.
its innocent until proven guilty and the accusations are weak as hell. in fact the whole thing makes no sense, if a pro boxer got into a street fight with regular ppl he would be knocking them out cold left and right. the result would be serious assault charges and lots of evidence. using common sense everything points to trouts story.