I do, and everyone should, feel badly for these officers who were trying their best to perform their duties. If anyone can watch and listen to them speak withoud doing so I have no idea what may be dictating their views.
Now, with that being said, I am also honest enough to understand these are just some of the testimonies we should be presented with, not a "one and done" situation so to speak.
And, as was the case in some of the several trials I observed as a jury member, those who were wronged always gain sympathy when heard first because as a general rule people really care for one another. Say a rape or kidnapping victim. The issue is that every other position has to be presented as well, all of them considered collectively and then a determination as to who is guilty of what is made. Not after hearing only one perspective.
Otherwise every family who has a loved one killed by a train could sue a railroad and receive millions every damn time because those testifying WILL be upset and pitiful and, hey, a railroad is a cold, faceless nothing with unlimited money but depending on the other factors....
Were the cross arms not functioning and the loved one killed when their car was hit by a train?
Did the loved just decide to end it all and chose to step out in front of a train so their family can get paid?
The varying factors all matter, so I'll wait and see.
What other positions...as relates storming the capital and beating police violently?