You know, I've read a couple of different versions of this article, some more lengthy than others, and while I like instant justice as much as the next guy, sometimes it can be misplaced.
One article that I read claims that the beaten man was having a consensual relationship with the woman when it was interrupted by her boyfriend. The boyfriend took offense at the activity going on and commenced with fisticuffs. After the matter was over, the woman said that the activity was not consensual.
Without knowing any of the parties involved, I can see a story in my mind where the "victim" of the crime may not be a "victim" at all, but rather changed her story to save face.
I'm not trying to "victim blame" or anything like that. If they truly are a victim, then I too am glad with the current outcome. I'm sure there is more evidence available to the investigating authorities that may prove one persons position beyond a shadow of doubt. But in this day and age of internet sensationalism, I've become quite jaded to headlines and the initial tellings of stories, and my first reaction is to doubt practically any story as it is first reported.
"Believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see.." - accredited to so many people, I really have no idea who said it first. But I think it's good advice.
And yeah, that guy looks like he could be an extra on Walking Dead without any makeup at all.
Good luck and take care.