Maybe she felt pressured into an agreement with the OP, then went home, asked the boy and when he denies she believes him. Now she doesn't want to pay anything for something her kid didn't do or at least says he didn't do. Just a thought.
Considering how many people on AO like to complain about how ineffectual our justice system is, it's surprising how many have absolutely no grasp of how burden of guilt works.
This is a he said, she said case. And admit it or not, if your kid claimed to you that he didn't do something, and your neighbor (the OP) had no proof whatsoever...I guarantee you'd be a little less inclined to offer to pay up.
Of course when it's not your kid, or your money you have all kinds of threatening advice.
My thinking would still be the same...THE OP HAS NO PROOF.
But that seems to be lost on you.
Could you kindly point out where I posted anything about who should pay for the window. I didn't go there because there is no proof of who broke it. What we do know is that there is a kid outdoors in the neighborhood with an air rifle , two windows have been shot, and there is a bylaw prohibiting the discharge of air rifles in the city. If the kid is prevented from using the air rifle in the city, or it is taken away from him, my prediction is that no more windows will get shot with an air rifle.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
Could you kindly point out where I posted anything about who should pay for the window. I didn't go there because there is no proof of who broke it. What we do know is that there is a kid outdoors in the neighborhood with an air rifle , two windows have been shot, and there is a bylaw prohibiting the discharge of air rifles in the city. If the kid is prevented from using the air rifle in the city, or it is taken away from him, my prediction is that no more windows will get shot with an air rifle.
And where did I say anything about payment. I was referencing you quote wherein you seem to be assuming the kid is guilty.
Can your or the OP prove that?