Without taking any position on the substantive matter; I would like to comment on your use of Occam’s Razor.
Occam’s Razor stipulates that, where there are competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions is usually the best choice. In this case, that would be that an unknown assailant hit the guy for an unknown reason. Then, there’s the hypothesis that it was a hate crime — which involves an assumption. Your hypothesis involves the several more assumptions; as you, yourself, point out in your post #13.
I’m with BlueNgold on this.
Thanks for your comment and I much appreciate the response. It will be interesting to see how this unfolds in the days ahead. If there’s not an actual hate crime angle, I suspect it will vanish quickly down the memory hole since the all-too-common faggot-on-faggot assault doesn’t advance the homosexual agenda.