That’s a fair question… My response is that I don’t think what I said is apples-to-apples to what the original comment I was replying to said and here’s why:
1) I quantified the statement, I’m not presuming, I’m conjecturing and said as much.
2) My conjecture is based on the video itself, and I was simply validating what he was already expressing in his own words… whereas Michelle (Mz) was invalidating what happened in the video by using anecdotal evidence to imply that her experience(s) being treated reasonably and respectfully by police is evidence (because she is also purportedly homeless) that the man in the video would’ve been insulted that the article emphasizes police brutality against racial minorities.
She also implied that the police treated him like that because he must’ve already had a history of negative interactions with them. I don’t think that’s a wild improbable conjecture to say that the man being assaulted by police in the video would be offended by someone saying, “Well, you probably deserved it based on your past interactions with police.”