I would like to know how someone who stole and then abandoned a kitten is not responsible for what happened to the cat next.
If you know it to be dead - because domesticated kittens after all are not necessarily capable of hunting nor traffic-aware, nor dog proof, and it is an act of animal cruelty to abandoned - then I suppose natural cowardice might lead someone to refuse to comment.
If you know it to be alive, then you are continuing to be horrible to the child who owned it and it is petty, mean-spirited and cowardly not to own up to the circumstances.
But stealing a child's pet is so despicable that I am not surprised that the perpetrator was unable to either care adequately for the animal in the aftermath, or come clean about responsibility for its absence and likely death.
And I think being an apologist for such an action is shabby too. And yes, I do look for integrity in those who we choose to serve us as representatives.