What started as an open-and-shut case of police brutality¹ has morphed into a Rashomon where truth is elusive².

The fatal incident took place around 10 pm on October 11 in the northeastern city of Harbin, Heilongjiang province. Two groups of young men got into a ruckus at a local watering hole. One of them was killed.

Tragedies of such random³ violence occur everyday all around the world and usually do not draw public attention. Add one dramatic element, and things take a dramatic turn.

It was revealed the day after that one group - of six young men - was made up of policemen and the other college students.

Online reaction was swift and unanimous: It was a demonstration⁴ of police brutality and must be condemned⁵.

A day later, a local television station aired a clip of the melee⁶ recorded by a closed circuit security camera. The group of students was exposed as being quite aggressive, especially the victim, who clearly initiated⁷ many of the attacks, while the policeman, in plainclothes (possibly off duty), were initially⁸ restrained.

The pendulum⁹ of public opinion quickly swung.

Many saw the policemen's acts as self-defense and argued that 22-year-old victim Lin Songling should bear some of the responsibility for his own death.

Then an unverified report emerged that Lin was the son of a rich businessman.

He drove a Mercedes and would soon report for a cushy government job.

All the students were from a sports college, meaning they were all physically¹⁰ strong. Lin himself stood 1.92m and majored in basketball.

In light of this, the tide of public reaction flowed very much toward policemen.

This incident is a reminder¹¹ that one should have a sense of justice but should not be carried away by it before the whole truth emerges.

The case made headlines mainly because people first perceived it as a struggle between the strong and weak.

When you mention a college kid beaten to death by cops, it conjures¹² up the ghost of Sun Zhigang and the 2003 Guangzhou incident that set a benchmark for tackling the police brutality problem. While police brutality is indeed a vicious virus existing in our society, one should not jump to the conclusion that a policeman in a brawl¹³ is always at fault.

What if there had been no video recording¹⁴ of the clash? To appease¹⁵ public anger, the court probably needs to dole¹⁶ out a harsher penalty than warranted.

If you dig deeper, the video does not provide sufficient evidence that can exonerate¹⁷ the cops.

The crucial "blows" that caused Lin's death occurred out of sight of the camera. And if there were no third-party witnesses around, it would be party A said, party B said.

When I travel around the country, I encounter stories of corruption¹⁸, ineptitude¹⁹ and various forms of social ills, yet many cases are not as black-and-white as they would have appeared had I stayed in my office and commented on them. To apply a framework of class struggle on every conflict would achieve nothing except giving oneself a false sense of moral superiority.

Before the whole truth comes out, let's play a game of fictional²⁰ twists: Lin was an orphan²¹ adopted by a self-made entrepreneur who had given generously to the Sichuan earthquake relief; the policemen came from poor families and recently risked their lives saving children from a fire. Now, give each of them a negative background story.

Mind you, these made-up tidbits have nothing whatsoever²² to do with who's guilty, yet they could well sway the court of public opinion.