"It is not indeterminate wether the attacker was targeting the vehicle or the man.
It shows clearly the attacker was targeting the man at the onset of the attack and only began to attack the vehicle as it was shielding the intended target.
The evidence is clear in the first 5 seconds of the video in which attacker clearly runs to attack the man, shouting "Shut the fuck up", making direct eye contact and raising his hand to swing against the man, but being deflected by the megaphone device.
It is clearly evident the attacker intended to target the man but simply failed to strike him."
Attacker to the stand
"Mr attacker was it your intent to strike the man with the megaphone."
"No, I was only trying to hit the vehicle"
Attacker to watch a slowed down replay of the first 8 seconds of footage.
"Mr attacker, you seemed to have attempted to strike the man through the window here."
Yeah - I'm not a lawyer but..
OBJECTION!
"It is not indeterminate wether the attacker was targeting the vehicle or the man.
It shows clearly the attacker was targeting the man at the onset of the attack and only began to attack the vehicle as it was shielding the intended target.
The evidence is clear in the first 5 seconds of the video in which attacker clearly runs to attack the man, shouting "Shut the fuck up", making direct eye contact and raising his hand to swing against the man, but being deflected by the megaphone device.
It is clearly evident the attacker intended to target the man but simply failed to strike him."
Attacker to the stand
"Mr attacker was it your intent to strike the man with the megaphone."
"No, I was only trying to hit the vehicle"
Attacker to watch a slowed down replay of the first 8 seconds of footage.
"Mr attacker, you seemed to have attempted to strike the man through the window here."