No one on this sub ever claimed that Adnan had no motive but Don did. No one. Ever. You're claiming the opposite. You're arguing against arguments that don't exist.

The other commenter pointed out your straw man fallacy and you copped an attitude. The user understandably and justifiably asked you to back up your false assertion about nonexistent people making imaginary claims. Of course, you can't cite any example because none exist. However, instead of graciously acknowledging that you may have misspoken (or using any other diplomatic solution you could have come up with), you berated the user and behaved as though he or she were out of line.

You don't think the rules apply to you? Whenever you blatantly violate one, you just wave it away by rationalizing how it applies to everyone but you and your situation?

The reason I called you out on your false claim was because you were rude to the other user. I didn't report your violation to the mods because I thought it would be more interesting to see how you handled it. Some people would-upon realizing their overt mistake-adopt a conciliatory tone and explain the reason(s) for their own misunderstanding and take responsibility. You, on the other hand, keep attacking and refuse to admit the possibility of any mistake on your part.

The rule about citation of sources exists precisely to prevent people from making false claims and straw man arguments. You're taking it further than anyone feared, I'm sure, by actually insulting people who ask for examples of your nonexistent claims.

If there are so many examples of people claiming that Don has motive but not Adnan, could you please show us one? I and the other user maintain that you are possibly mistaken about this.