Four is Fun.....

Mr. Oz had need of a Sawzall - or however you spell it. Found a good deal at Wally-world on a small one that would do the trick and was 50% off (if you click on the Wally-World link they still have it at their old price)! Plus it is cordless so more the better! (I think they were trying to off the old to bring in the "new improved" (meaning new package) for Christmas). Given that we have no Harbor Freight nearby, he didn't want to spend a mint on a tool that he wasn't going to use on any kind of a regular basis.

Last night he had plugged in the battery pack to charge it (it is a Black and Decker VPX - for whatever that is worth), and this morning, popped the battery in and tried it. Of course - he then set it down on the dining room table for use in an hour or so. Like most kiddos, the King cannot hear me when he is right next to me telling him to pick up a toy, but he can hear the sound of the saw and the clunk of something forbidden on a table that is well within their reach - and the King came running from the back of the house.

This prompted Mr. Oz to gather up the tool, and put it in the kitchen. About three minutes later, here is what Mr. Oz stumbled upon and the resultant exchange:

"Whatcha doin bud?"
"Whatcha Lookin at"
And off the stool the King hopped and ran away.

(Note the tool on the top of the cabinet - the King was truly trying to engineer its liberation)

So the question is to the lawyer in the family, my good buddy MEH, can he be busted for the thoughts - even though the action was too far out of reach????
Posted by Picasa


The Girl Next Door said...

ah my dear, while "intent" often makes one act more egregious, generally speaking, one must first have the "bad act." proving a thought? hmmmm if you're going for criminal mischief, then you are at the "beyond a reasonable doubt" proof, which would be difficult. Bring him up on civil charges and you merely have to prove a "preponderance of the evidence." (50.1%) But I wouldn't recommend a jury trial with that cute face!!!!

Carol P. said...

I hope we're not to the point of having thoughtcrimes yet. 1984 was a few years ago, right?

But I agree with TGND -- put him on the stand and the jury is in the palm of his hand anyway.

I see he inherited the same selective hearing that the rest of us got. Apparently, it's genetic....

Carol P. said...

I just had to leave another comment here, since the captcha is wonzh. What a lovely word, wonzh. I don't know what it means, but I bet I could work it into 4 or 5 sentences tomorrow. Wonzh! Even fun to type....