This suspect is innocent until proven guilty and we will all still be here when the trial finishes. There is no reason to rush out to come up with a viewpoint that might be shown false with later revelations. If we've learned something from the people who jumped straight to total confidence that it was caused by homelessness, then let's apply it.
The suspect is indeed innocent until proven guilty. I haven't advanced any claim that this particular suspect is the perpetrator; only that violent crimes are overwhelmingly committed by people known to their victims.
I hope that we can extend the same fundamental legal skepticism to society's most needy.
You appear the be incorrect according to the latest statistics I could find from the Bureau of Justice Statistics [1].
Most violent crimes are committed by someone known to the victim (defined as an acquaintance, friend, family member, or intimate partner) and of the ones you listed, robbery is the only exception (62% committed by strangers, 32% committed by someone known, and 6% is unknown).
Can you please direct towards the data you are citing?
The linked report seems to indicate, in every year of every chart, "stranger violence" to be 2-3 times that of "domestic violence" (depending on the specific measurement).
Perhaps you were citing reporting percentages?
Domestic Violence is defined in the report as "includ[ing] the subset of violent victimizations that were committed by current or former intimate partners or family members, spouses, boyfriends, or girlfriends."
Stranger Violence is not defined in the report, but seems fairly clear non-the-less.
The report also states homicide statistics are not included in the figures.
This suspect is innocent until proven guilty and we will all still be here when the trial finishes. There is no reason to rush out to come up with a viewpoint that might be shown false with later revelations. If we've learned something from the people who jumped straight to total confidence that it was caused by homelessness, then let's apply it.