OK, so in your terminology the thief got into a "disagreement" with the victim, then they contacted the arbitrator who assessed the evidence brought forward by the thief and the victim, and made a ruling.

Sounds like a very solid reasoning.

As I said, I have nothing against police and ECAF. They serve a very important role and I wouldn't want live in a country where there is no police (though I'd prefer a blockchain where there's no police, just voluntary arbitration).

Just stop pretending, call ECAF what it really is, and I'm fine with it. What I'm against is twisting reality to hide the truth.