You do not know what was left on the cutting room floor, so you don’t know if they expressed anything other than what you saw. I’ve done interviews, and can tell you that you have to plan exactly in order to convey the idea. They aren’t experienced and are dealing with the situation.
They fully acknowledged that it was the kid’s fault. But people on this site have selective hearing. They did not fault the victim. But questioning if he could have fired a warning is a way to wish the kid had not died. Because you didn’t hear things, or what you heard wasn’t in the words you would have used, is not for you and I.
I agree with you that there is nothing wrong with being judgmental. We have to make judgements every day. However, the nastiness that I am seeing on this thread is not being judgemental, it is being nasty. It is beneath good people to do this.
Nobody put those words in their mouths. I have listened to the following type of exchange my whole life, and this was 100% in conformance: "I know (Insert some kind of viewpoint or issue here), BUT ..."
What comes BEFORE the "BUT" is fodder to mollify someone else, the equivalent of patting people on the shoulder and telling them that their difference of opinion is important, it is what comes AFTER the "BUT" that is the key element to pay attention to.
Here is an exercise: The dead thug's family said (and I am paraphrasing):
"I know that what my son was doing was wrong and that man was defending himself, BUT I think he shouldn't have shot my son..."
Now, let's turn it around:
"I think he shouldn't have shot my son, BUT I know that what my son was doing was wrong and that man was defending himself..."
Do you see a difference in the entire message that same combination of words conveys? It is the "BUT" conditional statement that makes that change possible, and a lifetime of hearing it from people just made my ears stand right up, and my anger to boil over.
That is what made me angry.
How dare she burden that man defending himself with unfairly taking her son's life?