The radicals in Kiev have said NO to an investigation of the sniper shootings, which is why in light of this information, no one there trusts them.
How would shooting at both side benefit the rebels?
The Maidan radicals knew they could never gain power legitimately through the democratic process and therefore needed a 'bloody shirt' to rally support for complete overthrow of the government.
Their many attempts at provoking such a response from police using rocks, clubs, and fire bombs had failed, and they knew a peaceful settlement was close to being finalized which meant their 'revolution' would be over.
There needs to be a full accounting of the incident including an investigation into who was leading the protesters into that unprotected kill zone.
Well, they are the government, not you and not me. Like I said, from looking at the transcript there is nothing to investigate even if there was an incident of sniper provocateur. Firearms were used by both sides. Provocations happened on both sides.
needed a 'bloody shirt'
There are videos when it is clear the Berkut is shooting, and at whom, and people are dying. They got their bloody shirt plenty.
they could never gain power legitimately through the democratic process
Yeah, right. Then why Yanukovith refused to schedule early elections? Why didn't the Berkut encircle the approaches to the Maidan so the "radicals" get no food, water and tires to burn? I can tell you why: because they would have enough maidans everywhere. The Yanuk regime lost all legitimacy when they used militarized police on the demonstrations in December - January.