Update 16:36 GMT  This story gets weirder and weirder.  Allegations that shooter was NOT licensed to be a security guard.  See   https://youtu.be/wTVKAlExV04

Yesterday I published a story concerning the horrific shooting in Denver of a Donald Trump supporter. It was a breaking story at the time and as is usual for these stories, when the fog of war starts to lift, more of the story becomes visible.

From examining what a person whose judgement I trust, Tim Pool, said in a recent video on the subject of the Denver shooting, there is more coming out about this case. The Denver police denied that the shooter was Antifa despite the shooter having a tattoo that could be taken for being an Antifa tattoo. According to Mr Pool, whilst the alleged shooter is indeed a leftist and has connections to both BLM and the Occupy movements, there does not seem to be any link to Antifa. The Denver police seem to have been correct in saying that the suspect was not directly connected to Antifa.

There are allegations that the alleged shooter was employed by the Pinkerton Detective Agency who then supplied this man to the media outlet that used him to provide security for their journalist. However there are also claims made by Fox News that the alleged shooter did not have authority to act as an armed security guard and the 9News outlet in Denver said that there was ‘no record’ of the man being licensed as a security guard.

Mr Pool also cast a doubting eye over the idea that someone with known Leftist ideas should be employed to provide security cover at a pro-police and pro-Trump event. On this I agree with Mr Pool as those providing security should be professionals in what they do and not motivated or tainted by any political motives that could undermine that professionalism.

Mr Pool also examined images of the shooting that have been published online and he believes that it will be hard for the shooter to claim self defence as the mace sprayer’s hand was on the mace and not anywhere else such as a gun holster or a knife scabbard. My knowledge of the granular detail of Colorado’s self defence laws is not enough to make a full judgement of that claim by Mr Pool.

What I do know is that this case is an odd one. There are claims and counterclaims being made all over the place and by different people about this incident. As more comes out about it, more potential murkiness seems to be coming to light.

As regards the issue of the provision of media security, which a commenter raised recently, this is something that has been increasingly normalised over the last few years and especially in recent months in the USA. Mainstream media operatives are likely to be targeted by demonstrators or at least by the more bold and violent among them. I’ve seen the BBC get hassle from patriot demonstrators in the UK, but much of this hassle is merely chanting about how the BBC is fake news or mocking the BBC for employing Jimmy Savile. In the USA, where a lot of people are legally and routinely armed and where the BLM/Marxists have been exceptionally violent, the threat to reporters is far above that of mere chants from crowds.

Media organisations may well be under some sort of legal liability to provide security to those journalists who have been told by their organisation to go and cover a violent or potentially violent event. Providing security guards to these reporters may well be a way that the media company can legally protect themselves from any claim that they didn’t protect their workers from assault.

The initial reports into this case painted a picture of media security shooting dead a person who was of a different political tribe. There appear to still be aspects of this case that meet that description, but as more comes out about it, that is not just the only narrative in this story. I suspect that as this story unfolds it will become more complex and reveal many more incompetences by various actors in this case than has come out so far as well as more about the nature of the shooter and the circumstances of the shooting.