“Another question: How did Ukrainian police get to the scene if he was killed by Russians?”
Because the Russians are at one place and the police another. They are not at the same place. The russians are in Russian controlled area and the police are in Ukrainian controlled area. This isn’t hard Bob.
“Did the Russians really kill him and then hand his body over to the Ukrainians so that they (Russia) could be blasted in the media?”
No, if you read articles about it, his body was left there at the scene. Again, Bob this isn’t hard.
It’s okay to be skeptical. That makes sense. But you’re literally creating a new narrative by questioning a non-existent narrative with questions that have no bearing on what has been reported. You’re hunting for conspiracy theories by creating one no one was looking for. You’re doing a great job of following Umberto Eco’s outline on how to create fake stories as explained in his novel Numero Zero.
“Because the Russians are at one place and the police another. They are not at the same place. The russians are in Russian controlled area and the police are in Ukrainian controlled area. This isn’t hard Bob.”
I have NO CLUE as to what that means. I guess you’re saying that the Russians shot through Ukrainian lines and hit the ‘journalist’? I guess that’s possible, but should Russia be blamed for it, if it happened that way?