Answering your (perhaps rhetorical) question is hard without being there to see the actual guy.<p>Morality is situation specific, OP was there, perhaps if you were there you would have done the same.<p>There may have been other people whom most anyone would press charges apon.<p>Revenge is a dry &amp; tasteless dish against some. Some deserve justice, some need only pity and help. Rehabilitation is logically better than punishment. One case is unlikely to alter overall deterrance. Thus each case should be judged on its merits.<p>Perhaps the guy&#x27;s obvious disturbance was a ploy to fool the OP, luckily the cops could assit in this judgement with assesment.<p>This is the failure of Zero tolerance, when it produces obvious injustice. Equally this is the greatness of a judiciary who weight not only guilt but intent and circumstance.<p>The only <i>bad</i> or anti-social thing, is abrogating personal responsibility. Such as avoiding Jury Duty. Asimov&#x27;s 1st law shows both an action or inaction that cause harm are equivalent.