Themis wrote:Might be a good lesson in not jumping to a conclusion until more information is available, and it was the older guy with the drum who was getting into the boy's face. I might have reacted in a similar way, regardless of race, when I was 12.
The only conclusion that was falsified by subsequent footage was the conclusion propagated on social media about who started the confrontation. Nothing else has been falsified. No one has been "exonerated."
The irony here is that if we're going to start waiting for definitive proof for everything before we can draw conclusions, then we all need to just shut up about everything until complete audio/video footage of every verbal exchange comes to light. Yet, people like bach who are passing judgment on others for making reasonable assumptions about some of these kids, do so without enough information to know many things definitively. Meaning, they're doing exactly what they're accusing others of doing. Here are a few things we don't know definitively:
1. Whether Sandmann had malicious intent when blocking the old man (his say-so isn't proof either way)
2. Whether the kid who mocked with a Tomahawk chop was being racially insensitive (obviously he was, but those on the right dismiss it for some reason)
3. Whether the cat-calling kids on the bench were being disrespectful to those girls (obviously it was, but they're not addressing this either)
4. Whether the kid claiming Indians weren't really indigenous, started that spat
5. Whether "It isn't rape if you enjoy it" was in reference to abortion proponents claiming to be raped
6. Whether "Build that wall" was something any of the kids actually said (a lack of audio/video footage doesn't negate eye-witness testimony)
