is it common for other students to attempt to buy alcohol with fake IDs and these students were the ones stopped for it?
what I read - my first time reading about this - is that the shop owner correctly identified something sketchy was going on, and this escalated into an altercation with 3 underage patrons that the police got involved in as all 3 were arrested. The initial observation of "assuming theft" is supplanted by "trying to purchase with a fake ID", something common in a college town. How were these two things conflated? This isn't answered.
All three people plead guilty to different things unrelated to an assumption of theft, but pleading guilty doesn't reveal anything when understanding just how many people can't defend themselves in court.
The college shouldn't have gotten involved at all, regardless. This trend of "using your platform" needs to have counter-deterrents and consequences.
The people that actually boycotted and did slander-like things, shouldn't have acted without being more discerning.
But there's still something else in between that I can't garner from this. Anybody local have more personal accounts?