[ntsplnkv2]

This article doesn't disprove much.

Being "pro-trump" doesn't make the death not count. 3 of the five died because of the protests - it doesn't matter which side. You can argue that a stroke/heart attack may not have happened in a non-high pressure environment.

We don't need any more evidence than the mountains of video of people storming the capital. It's bad enough as is, it could have been far, far worse.

[Clubber]

The difference between someone dying because of a stroke and someone dying because they were bludgeoned to death with a blunt object over the course of several minutes while thousands of people stood idly by is stark.

[katmannthree]

Getting bludgeoned can cause strokes, among various other more and less pressing medical issues.

It's still murder when the victim dies in the hospital instead of at the scene.

[Clubber]

Yes this is true, but apparently he wasn't actually bludgeoned with anything although it was widely reported that he was. The current theory is chemical agents had something to do with it (like pepper or bear spray).

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/02/politics/brian-sicknick-charg...

>According to one law enforcement official, medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma, so investigators believe that early reports that he was fatally struck by a fire extinguisher are not true.

[ntsplnkv2]

Of course - but that just makes a bad thing worse.

The capital riots were bad. No amount of far right-wing sugar coating is going to change that.

[JamisonM]

We've got lots of video of people being bludgeoned that day while thousands of people either stood by or encouraged it. It seems like the specifics of the injuries and their consequences is actually the silly thing to be arguing about.