This story doesn't pass the initial "smell test". The guy's landlord "has been trying to get him to leave". Why is he still there?
All of the references in the article point to "evidence" that the person in jail was the one attacked. I bet that this is mostly B.S. and that the evidence points exactly the opposite.
While I cannot prove it from the lack of information in the article, the way that it is presented indicates to me that it is designed to muddy the water and portray the person arrested as "the victim", even though the facts may be exactly the opposite.