No she wasn't! I was too!
the defence offered by a man who was accused by his neighbour of having returned a kettle in a damaged condition. In the first place, he had returned the kettle undamaged; in the second place it already had holes in it when he borrowed it; and in the third place, he had never borrowed it at all.
Of course, I never claimed this fallacy was really novel, and I couldn't find any reference to it however hard I Googled, and anyway that post was forged by my evil twin brother Bray. But kettle logic, or kettle defence, is what this particular pot of iffy fish is called. Any pre-Freud denominations welcomed!