No. An arrowhead was found in his back. It's likely he was attacked.
No, I am not disputing he was murdered. I am questioning how the jump to the conclusion he was murdered because he was sterile and therefore an outcast. Maybe he was murdered because he stole things, or he raped someone, or he cast a really bad spell on a villager.
Anything for an academic fight. About on the same level as pinheads and dancing angels.
Just as likely he was a battle casualty, shot in the back, either from ambush, or while fleeing in retreat/covering a retreat. No where near enough data to even begin to make real assertions.
"Murder" is a cultural/judicial construct*; "violent death", and "homicide" are neutral terms that don't depend upon motivational deductions 5,300 years removed. We know nothing of the actual circumstances of his death, as to who was the aggressor; nor why; nor who his opponents even were.
Even the "sterility" claim is, though highly likely, speculative, as not ALL with the mutations who suffer low sperm motility are 100% sterile. DNA tests, in some cases have proved paternity by the affected male.
In addition, most ancient societies typically put the onus of no offspring upon the female...unless (but not even always then) she had reproduced previously.
*God's explicit prohibition wasn't formally handed down until approx 1,700 B.C., when The Law was handed down at Mount Sinai. Also, Biblically speaking, murder referred to premeditated, unlawful homicide, i.e. "lying in wait". Note that it exempted the "Avenger of Blood" (hence the Sanctuary Cities) for seeking righteous retribution, among other sanctioned deaths we would now refer to as murder.