Despite your admonition that, enough is enough, with regard to the long running accounts of Rim country justice, some of us can't resist one last parting shot.
However, after seeing the Friday the 13th headlines, one wonders what that great spinner of tales, Zane Grey, would have made of these scenarios. Perhaps he could have explained why the "bad guy" tracked down the "not such a bad guy" and punched him dead and then the bad guy wound up being not such a bad fellow after all?
Didn't the wise judge explain that, after all, his peers really didn't understand the situation and he could decide who the bad guy was.
It was explained to one and all that the wrongly accused bad guy was a good family man and local business owner, descendent of pioneers, who was only out to have a little fun and games with his young boy and girl friends.
Then this not a very good guy, somehow, got in the way and his jib wasn't cut right, or maybe, since jibs are not plentiful in the high country, it was his hairdo. Anyhow, he became dead and the "long arm" of the law was called in, to sort things out. But as things got sorted, it became rather fuzzy as to who the bad guy was?
So, the wise judge after much deliberation, said, bury the dead, and send the not such a bad guy back to his loving family and get back to business as usual. But some cantankerous persons weren't satisfied, so the powers that be brought another fellow in who pretty much agreed with the first wise man and told the not such a bad guy to go home and take care of his family and be a good boy.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, or was it in downtown Payson, a very bad person screwed up, by writing a bad check, and was brought to the bar for robbing some of the towns movers and shakers or "mucho pesos." They formed a kind of a posse and demanded her scalp, so another wise fellow remanded her to the lockup for a spell.
Let's get on with business, be it buying, selling or looking for water.
This writer served on two jury cases where the first wise judge presided. He, the judge, seemed like a decent sort of fellow and during a judge-to-jurors pleasantry exchange, I asked him how long he had been judging? His answer was "too long," and then added 18 years.
That was several years ago, so maybe by now it is even more "too long?"
Paul L. Ritz