There seems to be a tendency in discussions like this to equate the 'media' versions of the story with the official versions, and certainly when mainstream media gets things wrong, that's often argued to be evidence that the 'official' version is similarly wrong, and/or that official misinformation is the source of the media inaccuracy or deception.
But none of that is necessarily the case. We can't know the totality of what the 'official' case is until a prosecutor stands up in federal court and lays it out for the judge. Unless any of you have a hotline to Eric Holder?
In the Internet era there are lots of competing versions of events like this being put out by people with wildly varying amounts of information and credibility. Which ones any given person opts for has a lot less to do with critical analysis that most of us are prepared to admit, and a lot more to do with political/emotional/philosophical standpoints that frequently go unacknowledged or examined.