Now, That's What I Called Cheating

In the rule of law, in order to prove someone guilty of crime, the accused MUST fulfill all requirements for the crime they are accused of. For example in general cases of battery the elements or rules are 1.) the intentional causing 2.) bodily contact that is 3.) harmful or offensive to the victim without the 4.) victim's consent. If one of these elements or rules are proving wrong by the defense, then the accused is free from said charge. A fitting example is when two boxers are fighting, both of them had consented to cause bodily harm to each other; meaning no one can accuse anyone of battery after the fight. Why am I writing this? See in an ESPN Magazine report says, a major league pitcher accusing the Toronto Blue Jays of stealing signs during home games. I do have an issue with the situation in hand, but it is not for the reasons you think.
Cheating is always a problem no matter what field of life people are in. Now, it is time to fix the rules of cheating. Like our battery example, cheating will have elements or rules, but shorter and the accused defender must meet all four in order to be a cheater.

1. The accused must be fully engage to the act of cheating, and not trying to cheat. It does not make sense in trying to cheat, just cheat already.
2. Said cheater must truly benefit from the act of cheating, there's no point in cheating on a test, if you get a C instead of an A. In the Blue Jays' case, they should be at least 15 games over .500 at home instead of struggling to reach that mark if they are cheating.
3. Finally, said cheater must be CAUGHT in the act by a high power or by the victim with at least two witnesses. Just because someone accusing others of cheating, does not mean they are cheaters until proving guilty.  

Finally some ground rules on cheating and hopefully no one will not continue to spray the word cheater around for no apparent reason.

See you are not a cheater. You can breathe easier now.