Since Waleed is dead he can’t tell us, we are left with the other eyewitness to the scene.
“A” dosen’t know what was in Waleed’s mind either, and we are left with his perception of Waleed’s action.
There will never be, nor could there ever be proof of this.
Now why is there a question regarding this particular observation by “A” when all the rest is taken as accurate and truthful ?
Since it’s quite possible that “A” is correct in his interpretation of events, why the attack ?
Are we given any indication of “feelings of guilt” that Star Traveler insists upon as clouding “A”’s belief ? ... No
... but it appears that Traveler needs something, anything no matter how speculative to launch an attack on this particular portion of a narrative that otherwise is accepted as accurate and truthful - Curious indeed !
You said — “There will never be, nor could there ever be proof of this.”
What we can go on (assuming for the sake of discussion what we are given is true) are the stated facts.
And those stated facts show us that the killer returned to the room twice looking for signs of life, that the two students (Waleed and the anonymous student) were laying next to each other, that Waleed was wounded, that the killer entered the room once again (in regards to this event), that the anonymous student was playing dead, that Waleed moved, that the killer shot Waleed again, that the killer believed the anonymous student was dead (the anonymous student having played dead fairly well), then the killer left after he finished looking for signs of life and found none (at that point).
The only other thing is simply a “belief” that the anonymous student wanted to believe. And that was that the movement distracted the killer from supposedly killing the anonymous student.
However, if the killer is distracted for the moment and look at Waleed to kill him (since he moved), then the killer simply glances back at the anonymous student (after Waleed is shot deader than a doornail) and sees if there are any signs of life anywhere else. And that anonymous student was right next to Waleed.
And since we see that the anonymous student is not dead, this proves that the anonymous student “played dead” well enough to fool the killer.
Thus, Waleed moves, resulting in his death. The anonymous student plays dead, resulting in him living.
Regards,
Star Traveler
P.S. — However, now we have the troubling problem of not being able to even know if this e-mail is a hoax or the professor invented some “literary agent” upon us (the “anonymous student”) in order to perpetrate a “PC Hoax” upon the Amercan public. Since we are not able to verify this — it remains as valid “as news” as Aesop’s Fables are news...