I agree - normally I'd lend poor wording more grace, but it's very interesting that he repeatedly worded things poorly. The Senseless comment was one example, but it wasn't the only line that sticks out to me. "Gun-toting" to describe the father, e.g. Technically it's true, but it also is irreverent. He also refers to the family as a "pack." Again, not a falsehood - but why *that* word?? Why not group? Why not simply say multiple family members?
An understandable mistake for an amateur journalist. From the NYPost, I'd expect better.
Journalists choose their words carefully. Almost no article is 100% unbiased. In his defense, upon a reread, he does use biased language speaking of the assailant as well- it must not have stood out to me at first. It may simply be writing style, but it comes across *to me at least* as someone saying there are 2 parties in the wrong here. And again, some of the lines come across as irreverent which I just find inappropriate in this specific circumstance. but that's jmo, and the article very well could have read differently to others.