Nah. But you know that's not what I'm suggesting because you're not so daft. This is what I mean by "slippery".So you believe that Thornton would have done that out of the blue is what you're saying? Got it. Really not looking to get hung up on the minor points of a discussion if you're clearly not looking to have one in the first place.
Saying Orpik is responsible for Orpik's head being smashed in by Thornton because "Orpik's hit was a factor in the eventual outcome" is wrong. He's not responsible. He's not to blame.
By that logic virtually any victim of a violent/deadly act is "responsible" for their injuries/death because they've almost always contributed some factor that has incited the violence. Do you not realize how dangerously stupid your logic is?