Several reasons...first, she wouldn't be able to tell for sure if his
memory had or had not been "doctored" to eliminate the memory of the action.
(An upper-level Psi could notice the seams in the memory; she's basically a
business-transaction person who's a teeny bit over her head in what she's
doing, and she knows it.) Second, I'm playing constantly with how our society
will deal with this kind of telepath.

The idea is always "innocent until proven guilty." Now, you can bring
someone to trial, and a psi can scan them, and boom, you know one way or
another. But does that violate our judicial tradition of a trial BY JURY, and
put 'WAY too much power in the hands of telepaths? Because bear in mind, we
still have to take their word for what they "see" in someone's mind. They can
function as key witnesses, but it's my sense that they would be SPECIFICALLY
PROHIBITED from going into the mind of an accused person to determine their
innocence or guilt, *even if so invited*.

There are others, but those are, in my mind, the key reasons for this.
It's a matter of trying to be logical and consistent in how these things are
used; you don't want to have something (or someone) become the Magic Wand that
solves every problem, a Deux Ex Lyta, so to speak.

jms