This article is a perfect example of a dangerous article to read. Its simple factual and provides a simple narrative. A man after being questioned by police about a murder left to murder a man at his ex-girlfriends house and then a police officer firing multiple rounds into the officers back. Every single paragraph is condemning in fact you would be hard pressed to find a sentence that does not condemn the suspect. The narrative is convincing and works hard to fulfill our expectations on previous criminal activity resulting in more crime and deaths. They quote him threatening police from years before and drug activity as far back as 2001. they include a statement “Civil court records also showed no signs that Kato’s girlfriend or anyone else had requested temporary protection from abuse, the newspaper reported” which on the one hand exonerates him of something wrong on the other hand Immediately associates him with more crime. Now in none of this do I mean to imply that he dident do anything they described or that his behavior is justified merely that there is an entirely untold story here. Despite all this information we have no understanding of his motives or experiences. We have data as far back as 18 years ago but no representation about why or what he was trying to accomplish. Whether he is guilty or innocent it is still important that we hear both sides of the story. This for me is less about finding out right and wrong more so if we look into learning about these events we should at least understand something about what is going on not carefully selected facts. Lets learn and understand what we read about not just hear a caricature what of what happened even if it doesint free or condom anyone.