People seem to be coming to very strong definitive conclusions without much of the evidence required to make those conclusions.
You have to know whether the guy who was
shot displayed his gun. You absolutely have to know. If he displayed his gun to the police, that goes a long way to justifying the shooting. If the police had no evidence that he had a gun, and they simply shot a fleeing suspect (suspects are guilty of nothing, they are just suspects) in the back, then it would obviously be a terrible shoot.
I see some strange comments being made about how police can and should kill suspects of violent crime, because if they run they are a threat. That seems to misunderstand what a suspect is. I could call the police right now and tell them that any of you guys just committed armed robbery, and when they showed up you’d be a suspect. If one of you had some weed and tried to run, you should not be shot dead in the back for that. Running from police, in and of itself, is absolutely not an offense worthy of a killing. At that point, you wouldn’t necessarily even know they considered you a suspect of violence.
If you flashed a gun at the police, then ran, then it changes the whole story.
We’ll know eventually what the case what her. Body cams should explain a lot.