[r9etb]

Yes, I know what the article says. But, the article says that the "victims" were also all aged 32 to 61 - the same article that is ostensibly about a "19-year old American". I have no faith in this reporter's ability to get any facts correct, to especially include the wound patter, when they get other so patently obvious facts so plainly wrong.

You don't get to make up your own alternative facts, though, just because you don't believe the reporter.

[OldDeckHand]

"You don't get to make up your own alternative facts, though, just because you don't believe the reporter. "

The reporter has proven that she's incapable of getting even the most simple and straightforward "facts" correct. It's not a stretch to believe she transposed the the numbers when reporting the wounds. I don't get to make up facts, but I do get apply common sense. My common sense tells me that people who train every day of their lives don't shoot someone four times in the head, and once in the chest. That's just not they way they're taught or trained to engage aggressors. It's not plausible, at all.