Logic and Cats

A letter to NPR’s All Things Considered:

In his story on bird predation by cats, John Nielsen talks to Stanley Temple from the University of Wisconsin, who says he got multiple death threats from critics of his plan to declare open season on homeless cats last year. Nielsen follows a recording of one by saying: “Temple says the woman who left that message on his answering machine is now a convicted felon.” I’m surprised, however, by what Nielsen doesn’t say. He only claims that Temple “says” the woman was convicted, he doesn’t claim to have verified the fact. Nor does he say that what woman was convicted of, leaving the implication that her statement of declaring “open season” on Temple was the basis of the felony. Nielsen simply repeats what he’s told by Temple without giving the listener verification that the woman was convicted or that she was convicted of threatening Temple.

Nor does the other obvious logical conclusion get addressed. If there were indeed numerous death threats similar to the one that resulted in a felony conviction, either there should be more felony convictions or the call that Temple played for Nielsen is not representative of the group. Where are the other legal actions (assuming what Temple said about the call he played is true)? If there aren’t any, why was the one call played as representative of the rest?