As I stated, there’s conflicting information. What is accurate and what is not needs to be determined. What people state on this thread isn’t evidence. The “evidence” some want to use to suggest that the facts are all in is hardly sufficient. I’ve not found any credible “facts” which have definitively shown who initiated the confrontation between the two persons invovled. If I initiate a confrontation with another person, who begins to beat me, do I not bear responsibility at any level for what happens?
Sounds a lot different than...
Local authorities did a lousy job of investigating the incident, and there needs to be a thorough and unbiased investigation.
180 degrees different.
Depends on what you mean by “initiate a confrontation”. If I walk up to you and say “hey buddy! I don’t much care for the way you dress yourself!” and you physically attack me, knock me to the ground and beat me about the head and face, am I not justified in using force to stop your attack? Did I “have it coming”?
By the way, this is what I meant by “weasel phrases”. Please don’t think I mean to call you a weasel, or even to imply you’re doing it on purpose. This way of speaking clouds thinking and obscures fact finding:
“As I stated, there’s conflicting information. What is accurate and what is not needs to be determined.”
By whom? Who is this impartial person you want to do an investigation? And why in this case? Are there other police investigations you think should be re-investigated by this impartial person?
“If I initiate a confrontation with another person, who begins to beat me, do I not bear responsibility at any level for what happens?”
What do you mean by initiate a confrontation? Words? Following someone? Are there types of responsibility that aren’t criminal? Could someone make a decision that, in retrospect wasn’t the best, but that isn’t illegal?