It often amazes me how many people in Reddit love to assume that every potential hate crime against gays and blacks is automatically a "false flag" stunt perpetrated in order to attract attention and to gin up a particular political agenda by false victims, no matter what the context or the evidence.

I've seen quite the opposite and haven't ever heard accusations of something being a "false flag stunt".

While on the other hand and virtually in the very same breath, many of those same posters assert that in the absence of absolute evidence, that every police officer must be given the fullest benefit of the doubt in each and every case where excessive force, false arrest, illegal profiling or a valid lack of probable cause is either alleged or suspected.

Have you been unaware of the outrage on Reddit that occurs whenever the abuse of power or illegal act by an officer is brought up? Also the absolute point of the United States justice system is to presume ones innocence before they may be found guilty which is the benefit of the doubt.

And often, (Such as in the cases of the shooting deaths of Tamir Rice or Walter Scott) even in the presence of direct video evidence showing the malfeasance of the officers in question, the attitude remains among many posters here that these officers cannot and should not be held to the very same evidentiary standards as the rest of the public.

This is a massive generalization you are making. The only time that doubt in one of these cases (to my knowledge) was brought up was certain elements of the Michael Brown shooting that were then proven in a court of law to have not happened. I'm not sure if this what you are implying (please correct me if I'm wrong) but I'm not sure what "evidentiary standards" people are not holding to police here.