To be clear, I'm not saying that it would be okay for the police to assault Murdock if he were not white, or not wealthy, not male, or anything else. My point

To be clear, I'm not saying that it would be okay for the police to assault Murdock if he were not white, or not wealthy, not male, or anything else. My point was that if someone believes that the police are systematically targeting the less privileged, then they wouldn't have targeted Murdock. And while yes, Murdock appears to have had some kind of mental illness during all this, it's unfair to say that the police "targeted" him because of that without any evidence. It would likewise be unfair to accuse the police of targeting Murdock for being a black woman (if he were a black woman) absent some evidence to support that. Aside from Murdock's somewhat-incoherent twitter claims, there seems to be nothing supporting the idea that the police "targeted" him in any way or otherwise abused their power. So far it's purely speculation, and given that it's been six months, I have to assume no evidence will appear and the accusations of police misconduct here will remain baseless speculation. I understand your concern about ignoring complaints from the mentally-ill and other underprivileged groups being a bad precedent and a slippery slope to broader abuse. I agree and would not advocate for ignoring these sorts of complaints. I think each complaint should be given due consideration. In this particular case, with the information that has been made broadly available, I don't personally see evidence to support any claims that the police did anything wrong.