I am not a "liberal" but I am in "the legal field." And there's no such thing as an "innocent plea." It's called a "not guilty plea." We're all "innocent until proven guilty."
And if I was a judge, and anybody committed an unprovoked assault on somebody else, and this was somehow a bench trial, (which if any serious jail time is being considered, seemingly wouldn't be, as defendants almost always request a jury trial if they've got more than a violation and facing possible jail time), then in such a hypothetical situation, assuming there was evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused attackers physically harmed somebody else, with the intent to cause that individual harm, and the individual did in-fact suffer harm, then I would probably find the parties charged in said scenario, guilty of assault and battery. If any type of weapons were used in the assault, then probably would find them guilty of a felony assault, assuming the state prosecutor raised it as part of their charging documents, i.e., complaint, indictment, etc. The race of either side, has nothing to do with this, unless it was specifically the motivation of the crime, and some sort of statutory hate crime was specifically raised and there was evidence to meet the elements of a hate crime, but that's not even brought up in your hypothetical, other than mention of the race of one of the parties, which is completely irrelevant, as just like Lady Justice wears her blindfold, my decision would be blind to this.