Yes, Dorner was a murderer who killed innocent people,

[graham4anything]

62. without Dorner, there was no collateral damage

any side issue is completely separate.

Zimmerman killed Mr. Martin

Were a librarian to walk into the street and shoot Zimmy afterward, because Zimmy had an overdue book, would have nothing to do with the fact that Zimmy killed Mr. Martin in cold blood.

It would be a second event warrant looking into, a side issue
(note librarians are on my mind from a different thread, so using one as an example).

The corrolation of A B C D is wrong to apply that ABCD are equals.

A=B
if B led to C and D occured, that was an event directly tied to A
then BCD are indeed part of A. but occurred BECAUSE of A.

without A
BCD wouldn't have happened

simple math and raw statistics.

As cops don't routinely open fire randomly, BCD would NOT have happened without A.

That some or a handful might have had events in their past that are not legit, so to say,
that has nothing to do with this story, and to imply that every single cop in the history of Los Angeles is bad is randomly statistically totally wrong.
Because even if 99% were, the 1% are being smeared and their good names ruined.

Here, Dorner is the 1%(he is indeed a BAD COP) because he went and took the law into his own hands and a cop, working or retired or fired, knows the rules.
DORNER IS 100% GUILTY of any collateral damage just by statistical analysis alone.
Because
Dorner is A and B and C and D occurred because of Dorner.

NEVER FORGET- DORNER IS A COP. KNOWS THE RULES.
SO DORNER IS A BAD COP.
DORNER IS THE WHOLE STORY. BEGINNING MIDDLE END OF STORY.

(caps on purpose because this story annoys me and I am mad as Hell at Dorner, and no,
not going to take it anymore so I am opening my window and screaming it.
DORNER IS GUILTY. DORNER IS A COP. DORNER IS A BAD COP.