"Many posters here simply could not let go of their point of view that texting in public is so annoying that they would take to a thread about a man shot dead to complain about texting in a movie..."
The texting in and of itself isn't really that important. The person who was shot could just as easily been talking on the phone, kicking the seat in front of him, or smoking a cigarette.
Your entire basis for this line of argument is irrational based on a faulty chain of logic.
If he gets off, it could just as well be a "blue line" defense, or a mental health defense, or any number of things.
The most logical defense in this case is self defense.
"Neither of us can possibly know the real truth..."
I agree but we do know some truths.
1. The media is biased and will always portray a public self defense situation in the worst possible manner.
2. There is a well documented campaign by this administration to curtail the right of American citizens to own, carry, and use firearms.
3. People have the presumption of innocence by law.
I have never said this person is innocent. I don't have enough facts to determine this either for or against, however the media finding and reporting about witnesses that support their narrative (and only witnesses to support their narrative) and the prosecution trying their case in the press simply doesn't not rise to any standard of proof that I will believe. I don't know how anyone could, I would have thought people would have learned their lesson already on this. Maybe it's just a happy coincidence that the press can actually drive their narrative of evil gun owners by accurately reporting the facts without their normal bias, but I wouldn't bet money on it.
Actually, it's not. It's just less long-winded than yours, and I actually wished to communicate with others, not try to compete or show off ostensible erudition. So we're done here. Enjoy your moral and intellectual superiority. Try it on a policeman next time you're pulled over, dude.