In other words, when the guilty person does receive some form of punishment for their actions, but immediately afterward are made to look so sympathetic that everyone else feels guilty about it and ends up apologizing to them instead of the other way around (http://officialfan.proboards.com/thread/514859/times-sympathy-blame-wrong-character) like it should have been.

An example of that is Earl from That '70s Show. He's a friend of Red, and worked under him at Price Mart, until Red fired him for being lazy and always coming in late. Later, Earl tries to sue Red, but loses because he shows up over an hour late to his own hearing. Later still, Earl gets a job at Fatso Burger. Red, not knowing that Earl is working there, complains about the food which gets Earl fired. Then for the rest of the episode Kitty guilt-trips Red about Earl losing his job until Red finally caves in and helps him get his job back, despite the fact that Earl is still a lazy, good-for-nothing employee.

Now, why the Hell is Kitty siding with Earl in the first place? Here's a guy who's not even qualified enough to flip burgers AND previously tried to sue her husband. Yes, Earl and Red were old friends, but at this point Red doesn't owe anything to Earl, so why should he feel bad about it?