Police tried to step in to stop the mobs, but were attacked themselves.
The argument
Police tried to stop the lynching, but were instead attacked by the mob and could not save the victims. A statement released by the local police stated that “one of our patrolling vehicles later spotted the severely injured trio lying on the road and stopped to investigate. However, our team was also attacked by the mob and the vehicle pelted with stones. Our personnel had to flee and were unable to rescue to the victims”. They clearly were not complicit; they were just, sadly, unable to save the victims.
Premises
Counter-arguments
The police did not try to stop the lynching. Video of the lynching shows the police letting it happen, and police were then suspended over the incident.
Rejecting the premises
[Rejecting P1] The premise rests on the account of the force whose conduct is in question. Footage of the incident was read as showing officers present while the attack went on, and personnel were subsequently suspended over it — which is not what an account of a thwarted rescue would predict. [Rejecting P2] Being outnumbered would explain a failure to rescue, but the allegation concerns what happened before that point: whether the crowd was dispersed when it could have been, and whether the men were left to it. Withdrawing under stones does not answer either question.