Are the bear and rodent famous fictional characters?
Pooh bear?
Paddington bear?
Mickey Mouse?
Bugs Bunny?
Peter Rabbit?
Fictional, yes; Pooh, Paddington, Mickey, Bugs, Peter, no.
Was a show about a bear supposed to be on TV but actually the show with the rodent was, showing she didn’t really watch?
She was being honest, and no alibi was at stake.
Is the bear a non-animated comic character?
Is the bear an animated cartoon character?
Is the bear a character from a book?
Is the rodent a non-animated comic character?
Is the rodent an animated cartoon character?
Is the rodent a character from a book?
Is the bear a specific individual?
Is the rodent a specific individual?
Is the nature of the crime relevant?
Did the wife know of the crime?
Was the mention of the wrong animal a momentary mistake on the wife’s part (i.e., would a few moments of self-reflection have revealed to her “Ooh, I shouldn’t have said that”, or the like)?
Was the mention of the wrong animal the result of a mistake of fact (“Oh, I thought that character was on a different show”)?
Is the nationality of the criminal relevant?
Is the nationality of the wife relevant?
Was a language barrier relevant?
Was a cultural difference relevant?
Let me make sure I understand what you mean: if, instead of bears and rodents, I’d been talking about, say, Superman, would you expect me to say “yeah, a non-animated comic character, and an animated cartoon character, and a character from a book” — and also to agree if anyone asks about a live-action TV show and a video game, and so on?
Yes to both.
No. Yes.
I don’t believe so. It’s hard to be sure, but I think there’s pretty good evidence that, no, she had ample time and plenty of reason to reconsider her remark, and that it didn’t dawn on her.
No, her comment was accurate.
No to all three.
…arguably? But that’s kind of a stretch; it feels like I could mislead you by saying “no”, and that I could mislead you by saying “yes”, and I’d rather not go down either road.
Is the rodent:
- mouse
- rat
- squirrel
- porcupine
- beaver
- guinea pig
- hamster
- rabbit / hare (technically, no longer classed as rodents, but often still described as such)
A rat.
All of the questions are independent. They could have multiple yeses.
Is the arguable cultural difference based on age? On occupation?
Are the rat and the bear part of the same fictional continuity? Do they typically mostly appear in the same works?
(one possible wild-assed guess)
Is the rat (in its primary form of depiction) a puppet? Is the bear?
(another possible wild-assed guess)
Is the rat Scabby, the union mascot?
Is the rat from:
- Ratatouille
- Secret of NIMH
- TMNT
- The Wind in the Willows
- Muppets
- Pearls Before Swine
- Dilbert
- Flushed Away
- Willard/ Ben
No to both.
I don’t believe so.
…not sure what you’re asking.
From a look at various definitions: yes, they appear to qualify.
No.
Nope.
As an example, Miss Piggy and Cookie Monster are part of the same continuity, both being Muppets and both being friends of Kermit, but they almost never appear together. But that was mostly a follow-up question, mostly rendered moot by them not being in the same continuity.
Ooh, thought of another one: Is the bear a literal ursine? Is the rat a literal rat? (as opposed to, say, a hirsute gay man and an organized-crime informant)
Literal. (I mean, in the sense that Kermit is a literal frog, even if he rides a bicycle and pitches ad campaigns and winds up marrying a pig.)
Were they cheating in some kind of game, quiz or test?
On a TV show?
They gave the correct answer(s) to a different question(s) showing they had advance knowledge?
Nope.
If it helps, the criminal had a doctorate.
Would it help to know the type of crime? Never mind, you answered this eariler.
As you said, I don’t see how; but, just in case: it was drugs. The guy was selling drugs while he was still in school, and, well, he kept right on moving product after he got his degree, is all.