Day 92

Writing Exercise – multiple views of the same event

…

I was given the brief to interview the witnesses regarding a theft, in plain sight, of a backpack from a university student who was engaged in conversation outside a cafe. I had been asking for more responsibility, and this, I was told, was the first test.

It was a simple set of questions: ask the witnesses what they saw and any means of identifying the thief.

Witness 1: Winifred Atkins, age 67

“What did you see?” was the first question.

“Not a lot. But…”

She looked the helpful sort, with a ready smile, some might call mischievous.

“There were six of them, students or teenagers perhaps. Pity they didn’t know how to dress properly, but these days, you know, anything goes.”

I nodded. I was sure the next witness would see them in an entirely different light.

“Anyway, they were talking, or maybe arguing. I could see the victim, the one who had her bag taken, was getting annoyed at the others. Something about a boy, but, then, isn’t it always at that age?”

“Is that what drew your attention to the group?”

“That, and that one of the other girls called her a rather bad name. It upset her, and that’s where the arguing started. It was distracting.”

“The victim was distracted?”

“No, I was. That’s why, when my attention was on the two of them, one almost trying to strangle the other, and I think I would too given the language, that’s when the thief came and went so quickly it was a blur.”

“From where?”

“Inside the cafe. By now, everyone was watching the two girls trying to strangle each other and the boys egging them on. Someone should strangle them. That’s when he picked up the bag as he walked past, and no one at that table noticed. No one. Not surprised.”

“Can you describe the thief?”

“Young, their age or a little older, hat covering his face, clothes shabby, those jeans with cuts in them, sandshoes, green t-shirt.”

“Any identifying marks?”

“None I could see. Only saw him for a fraction of a second; the fight was getting heated. That’s all I’ve got.”

…

That was the first. The second witness was Janet Wakely, aged 15.

“What did you see?”

“A fight. Some girl called the other girl a slut, and they went at it. I would have videoed it and posted it on the Internet, but I know you lot would have got in a twist over it.”

My boss would. I would have been able to use it as evidence. Pity.

“Then…”

“The victim wasn’t a very nice person, stealing that other girl’s boyfriend. Maybe you could charge her with theft.”

I tried to explain that the law didn’t work like that; it had to be a criminal offence like stealing property, like the girl’s backpack. “Did you see it happen?”

“Some old guy came out of the cafe with a coffee, walked past the table, and just picked it up. They were all carrying on so, they never noticed a thing. Brazen.”

“Can you describe the thief?”

“Oldish, about 30, maybe 40, you know. Levis, Nike shoes, the expensive sort, and one of them expensive polo shirts, you know, with the horse emblem. He had a hat with a maple leaf, which was odd for someone in this country to wear; maybe he was a foreigner.”

At least, at the end, she said he had gone up the same street as the previous witness.”

…

I made a call to our IT person and asked if any video had been posted on social media, guessing that my previous witness had, in fact, filmed the whole argument and posted it, and I was right.

And viewing it, I wasn’t surprised that both of them were wrong. A man had come out of the cafe, but he had walked straight past them. It was one of the boys at the table who had detached himself at the high point of the fight and taken the backpack while all their attention was focussed on the fight.

…

©  Charles Heath  2025