>>Apparently it is OK for him to assault the other person because he dared to walk near him, right? Breaking his nose, beating his head on the concrete - that's OK. I assume that it's ok because he was black?
>>
>>God knows who you would be lynching if the colors were reversed (actually, it is obvious).


>How do you, or Mike C or John B know who started the attack on whom? Is not possible that Z threw the first punch and then he was bested?

We don't. The only thing we have to go on is what was revealed in court, which is far more likely than Mike Beane's dream scenario of blatant, unchecked racism.

>Just rhetorical questions, for as I said before it really does not matter as it is just dodging the more important questions, for example why is it that a civilized society needs armed civilians patrolling the streets, shouldn't that be the focus of the discussions?

No.