When you don’t have the right to “the other side of the story”

There is always “the other side of the story”. There is always another opinion and before make your judgment you have to listen to it. But do we always have to?

There are facts that overdraw any comprehension.
There are facts that can not be explained to the others.
There are reasons that are not real reasons but madness.
Is there always “another side of the story”?

Like Norwegian situation. That man (should we call him human being?) is asking for the possibility to explain itself. What possible could be “his other side of the story” to make the judgment different from Atrocious, Outrageous, Monstrous.

There are levels of comprehension. There are levels of understanding. There are levels of normality. Beyond them there is no other side of the story.