It's all silly, playing internet detective or internet general or whatever it may be - but that's not something I'd deride.
Look, I don't know if you don't understand how to play the game, but if you word your arguments right, you can be a 'contrarian' - you can make a point against the masses. It's just that obviously when you take up such a position, you need to tread extremely carefully. Not fair, but practical.
Me, for example? I think that race plays a negligible role in what happened. Taking up that position, and arguing it has never gotten me yelled at in this thread, called names or anything - you just need to know your audience.
When people ignore plausible arguments from one side, they're doing a disservice to all of us. I say "us" because this case has racial repercussions across the country, and I'd just like to see rationality win at the end of the day, which at this point in time seems unlikely.
This thread, just like any other discussion on an Internet forum, would be so much more constructive if every poster involved didn't have an agenda or tried to distort the facts. But that's a pipe-dream.