What if you knew her and found her dead on the ground?

[Loyal Rogue]

The article I am quoting is based on eye-witness accounts. Eye-witness accounts were part of the multiple court cases deciding on the matter.

My position includes credence to eyewitness accounts.

--

The guardsmen were not "rushing" or "ambushing" the rioters. They told the rioters to disburse with a bullhorn and the rioters responded with violence. The guardsmen moved toward the mob to try and enforce the disbursement. But, the mob continued the violence, forcing the guardsmen to go back to where they started.

That is bearing down on by the rioters. That is retreating by the guardsmen.

So in other words, you have no basis or evidence of eyewitness accounts to back up your position other than your interpretation by twisting the meaning of a few words in the summary by author.
Thanks for clearing that up.
I would have been willing to listen to and consider any actual eyewitness testimony you had to backup your opinion, but unfortunately you aren't as openminded about the situation or you would have listened to the interview I posted.

It's interesting that the same people that think enemy soldiers caught in the battlefield should be tried in the same way as Martha Stewart are unwilling to accept the legal outcome of the Kent Shootings.

I guess, in your eyes, you lose rights when you join the US armed services but you gain rights if you try to kill US troops in foreign lands.

I said no such thing and took no such position.
Do you take the outcome of the OJ trial as the God's honest fact that OJ was innocent?
Is every legal decision ever made by the court accurate and just?
I don't live in a world of absolutes like you seem to.
I judge every case based on it's individual situation, motive, and evidence.