I do since there is no evidence substantiating his claim that it was in self defense. Such evidence would be bite marks or at least torn pants. Neither of which happened.
As for shooting the delivery driver, I'm sure the poster was merely exhibiting his frustration at the stupidity surrounding the support of the delivery driver.
Especially considering that the driver was in violation of company policy against carrying firearms......
That in itself will warrant a legitimate lawsuit against Instacart.....
There’s no evidence it wasn’t.
It’s just that people are presuming it wasn’t for any more reason than they don’t want to give him the benefit of the doubt.
You apparently completely missed the point of that.
A) Significant physical damage must be proveable before self-defense.
-OR-
B) The threat must be significant.
- - -
B is the standard, thankfully, because, for example, the victim might be your daughter whom you are defending.