Even if I saw something like that happen in front of me, I would not call it clairvoyance. Maybe she knew something. Maybe she knew the thief. Maybe they conspired to do this together 
But when exaggerated by a chain of illiterate bulgarian peasants (whose predisposition to superstition is high), then turned into an urban legend that spread through Eastern Europe, and is now written in 2009 on Russianatlanta.net, digesting stuff like this really does take simple faith. Not anything deductive. Which is fine, it just won't convince anyone who doesn't already believe in this stuff.
Interestingly, this stuff always convinces the believers, even though believeng in clairvoyance does not in itself make the event you described true. Just a sidenote about the mindset. I have always found this an interesting subject in sociology. Explains why every culture had a religion worshiping completely randomly selected beings/objects, and being absolutely convinced that their object(s) are clairvoyant in the sense that they are responsible for certain aspects of fate.
In my non-professional opinion, there is a psychological void in the frontal lobe of the human brain, that needs to believe is stuff like this. It can be partially satisfied instead by factual information, knowledge and rationality, but not as cleanly. Something is still missing.
"The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money" -Margaret Thatcher