On the one hand, I completely agree with you about having some degree of compassion towards everybody regardless of what they&#x27;ve done, but on the other hand, I&#x27;m not exactly sure what it would change, or if I could remotely justify telling people that their feelings are &quot;wrong&quot; despite them being deceived.<p>It&#x27;s perfectly reasonable for people to feel anger&#x2F;resentment&#x2F;distrust towards somebody that has done them wrong, just as much as it is perfectly reasonable for a person to feel horrible once they start being the center of attention for having done something wrong. The key difference between these two emotional states, is that one side knew what was happening (i.e. the one committing the act of deception), and the other one didn&#x27;t. That gives the person committing the deception the upper hand in predicting the outcome of the whole situation, because they must know to some extent that getting caught is one of the possible outcomes of their actions; willfully ignoring this reality isn&#x27;t equivalent to never even knowing it could exist (as would be the case for victims).<p>Now typically, anger isn&#x27;t very productive, but neither exactly is total compassion. Pure indifference is the closest thing to a neutral state in such a situation, and from such a vantage point, people getting angry at being deceived and people getting depressed at being caught is completely logical, and admissible as long as there isn&#x27;t any real destruction or bodily harm going on. I mean, we could feel sad for a shady person feeling sad in addition to all that, but what will that accomplish?