In article
..com, 1506 writes


The evidence is the distress.

So all that's needed now is to produce a witness who claims to be
distressed to make anything illegal.

Except for certain specific offences (speeding in a motor vehicle
being one of them), the uncorroberated evidence of a single witness
can be enough for most offences, provided the court believes them.


But who, other than the distressed person, can possibly testify as
to whether he or she was indeed distressed? Any other person's
opinion would be just that - an opinion, not testimony on a matter
of fact.

--
Bill Borland