In this lamentable affair, where a man's sight was cruelly extinguished by the very forces meant to safeguard the public good, I am reminded of the delicate balance I have long advocated in 'On Liberty'—that the sole end for which mankind are warranted in interfering with the liberty of any member of a civilized community is self-protection. Here, the deployment of force appears not as a necessary restraint against harm, but as an overreach that inflicts unnecessary suffering, violating the principle of utility by diminishing the greater happiness. Were I to witness such events, I would urge society to scrutinize the proportionality of state actions, ensuring that individual freedoms in assembly are not sacrificed to the altar of misguided order, for true progress lies in fostering enlightened restraint.

Ah, in this tumult of celebration turned to tragedy, I see the perils of unchecked enthusiasm and the fragile threads of social order that I warned of in my 'Reflections on the Revolution in France.' The police, as agents of established authority, must navigate the chaotic impulses of the multitude with prudence, lest their interventions exacerbate the very disorders they seek to quell. Yet, this verdict reveals a deeper flaw: the erosion of traditional restraints when power is wielded without due reverence for inherited customs and the common weal. I would counsel that true justice demands not merely compensation, but a restoration of the moral fabric that binds community, preventing the descent into anarchy through wise, tempered governance.

This grievous injury inflicted by agents of the state upon an innocent celebrant strikes at the heart of the principles I espoused in 'The Rights of Man'—that government exists to secure, not to violate, the natural rights of individuals. In the midst of joyous assembly, such force represents a tyrannical abuse, echoing the oppressions against which I rallied. The jury's decision to demand restitution is a step toward accountability, affirming that no authority should escape the judgment of the people when it oversteps its bounds. I would declare that this event underscores the eternal struggle for liberty, urging reforms that protect the right to gather freely, lest we revert to the despotic chains we once broke.

In observing this modern discord, where a guardian of the polis blinds a citizen in the throes of communal festivity, I am drawn to my teachings in the 'Nicomachean Ethics' and 'Politics'—that justice demands virtue in rulers and a mean between excess and deficiency. The use of force here seems immoderate, failing to uphold the common good by inflicting undue harm upon one engaged in lawful assembly. As the polis must foster eudaimonia for all, this verdict serves as a corrective, reminding leaders that authority without ethical restraint breeds injustice. I would advise that true statesmanship lies in cultivating laws that balance order with the rights of individuals, preventing such tragedies through reasoned deliberation.

This incident, where a police projectile robs a man of his vision amid public rejoicing, compels me to invoke the categorical imperative from my 'Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals'—that one must act only according to maxims that could become universal laws, treating humanity never as a means, but as an end. The employment of force in this context appears as a categorical violation, lacking the moral autonomy that should guide state actions. Such a ruling underscores the imperative for accountability, ensuring that officers adhere to duties rooted in universal reason, not mere expediency. I would assert that only through respecting the inherent dignity of every individual can society achieve perpetual peace and just governance.