One could never completely evaluate all "possible" hypothesis. How about all plausible ones, based on the evidence that is available?
Not a lot , indeed , because one of the party is no more there.
The jury is left hearing only one party , and one that is at
risk of being jailed for 30 years and as such is likely to lie
as much as possible in the limits of what is possible.
The jury has to confront the remaining guy to make sure
that he didnt implement a scenario to escape porsecution.
Instead , it relied on reports that branded the victim
as an eventual future thug as a mean to give credibility
to the murderer sayings that TM was acting suspiously.
In the report of the events what i find disturbing is that
no more than 2 minutes passed between the moment
he ended the call saying the guy was out of sight
and the moment the police arrived at the place.
It makes no doubt that the victim didnt knew that he was
armed , otherwise there would have been no possible fight ,
it s only during this fight that TM saw the weapon and then
tried to remove it to not be killed but contrary to the murderer
claims TM wasnt strong enough to really beat him , prove is that
he didnt manage to retain or deviate the murderer arm/hand.
The other possibility is that he didnt see the weapon at all
and that s why the murderer , rather than giving back punches ,
just had to put his hand on his pocket and then shoot the guy
who had hardly given more than a weak punch , given the picture.
In both case it s obvious that this ended badly because a guy;
rather than listening to the police , choose to arrest himself
a random black youth thinking that he was a genuine looter
and that anyway the police was to give him credit and who
knows , congratulations.
Notice that i mentionned two cases where eventualy
TM could had initiated the fight but surely not gratuitously ,
something happened that triggered the events extremely
rapidly given the said two minutes delay but for sure the jury
didnt explore much whatever was going against an acquitment..