Courts are permitted to return the judgment "Not Proven". In places where "Not Proven" is not an option, "Not Guilty" covers both "Innocent" and "Guilt has not been proven." Historians, having more nuanced language at their disposal than the limited options offered by the courts, can certainly offer a multifaceted narrative. Hence Yair Sheleg's reasoning is faulty. Even if we accept his strange demand that historians are to be held to the same standard as the courts (and why is that?), then historians too must be allowed to write ambiguous histories.
Monitor: Clashes near Damascus despite truce there, five killed in Aleppo (Reuters)
from the article: Despite everything, one truth