Originally Posted by cutthemdown
It's because the dude went got another gun, came back, and shot the guy execution style, point blank into the chest.
Hard to argue you were in fear. Better argument IMO is to try and say the robber was already dead from shot to head.
Otherwise that dude should have erased the film, lost the film, something.
4 cops fire 41 shots into an unarmed guy and they were in fear?
So if the medical examiner says the kids was still technically alive doesn't that play into "his life may have still been in danger"? All I'm saying is what is good for the goose should be good for the gander.