> There are vey few surveillance videos of that incident publicly available.

Indeed. That's what I wrote.

I think it's a good thing.

Why would you want to be less informed? Such information shouldn't be sensationalized or exploited for profit, but nor should it be suppressed. If you choose to kept in the dark - which is not the same thing as choosing not to look - then you are inviting deception and exploitation.

The lack of presented evidence feeds theories and ideas about what actually happened, strengthens local anecdotal witness word of mouth stories. Epstein is a good example of this, more questions than answers and a sudden silence from the corporate media

There are no remotely mainstream conspiracy theories about the London Bridge attacks. There is enough trust in our police, government, legal and justice systems and journalists to assume they aren't making this up...