Yeah, that's exactly what I said in my post. But if what they did was within department training then it's what he was trained to do. And the guy did reach behind him and his elbow came up as his hand came forward. The exact motion of someone pulling a weapon. He was told he would be shot if he did that and he did it twice. That cop was trained to shoot under those circumstances so the jury found it was a justifiable shooting because the cop reasonably believed his life was in danger.
Everyone keeps saying he put his hand behind his back twice, as if drawing a weapon, after being told not to. The first time he put BOTH hands behind his back while he was on his knees as if he was assuming the position for police to cuff him. It looked nothing like he was drawing a weapon and at that point in time he had not been instructed on what to do or not to do with his hands. It was then they told him they would shoot him if he did it again. The guy was obviously very distraught and they continued to make it worse, guess when people are most likely to make mistakes? The second time he was on his hands and knees 6' away from the cops, there were 4 guns trained on him at least, including two AR-15s, with fingers on the trigger. Especially with the rifles, the angle of the shot and the fact that they were in a crowded hotel there was a very good chance that an innocent civilian on the floor below could be shot. Now personally I don't think that it should require all of these factors, not to mention a slew of others I didn't list, but when you do consider all of these factors there is no way in hell he should have shot the guy just for making a move with his hand. They would have had plenty of time to fire and had more than enough eyeballs on him from different angles to wait until they actually saw something, any damn thing, in his hand before not only killing him but endangering the lives of other innocent people at the hotel. As I stated before, we know the cops were concerned about injuring people on the 4th floor because they assigned two officers to wake up everyone on the 4th floor to make sure they had not been hit. I can even give you their names if you want, there were about a dozen people they had to ensure they didn't accidentally shoot after the unnecessarily shot an unarmed man who anyone with an ounce of reason could see was trying his hardest to comply.
Someone said if the cops hadn't ordered the guy to crawl to them and walked up to cuff him while he was on the floor that his kids would still have a father. How about if the guy hadn't been drunk and playing with a BB gun at the window of his 5th floor hotel room? Folks in a hot tub below saw him point it out the window towards a highway. We are quick to jump on a cop for following bad training (IMHO) and call him a murder, but we give the idiot who cause the situation a pass on the stupid actions that got him killed.
Being drunk and doing something stupid that has no intent to harm anyone else, doesn't harm anyone else and I'm not even sure if it's even illegal shouldn't get you executed by the state. He was showing a guy the scope on his pellet gun FFS. Now that we have found them not criminally liable this is once again shown as perfectly acceptable. Even the police department has no real incentive to change any policy because the very large payout the poor widow will get will be paid by the city and ultimately the taxpayers who they endangered.
BTW, I stopped buying the "following policy" bullshit a long time ago, I don't give a fuck what the policy is it doesn't give you the right to break the law especially when we are talking about murdering innocent people. Their job is to protect the public not kill an innocent man and knowingly endanger a dozen other innocent civilians for no reason. To me the entire "following policy" bullshit is no different than "following orders" being an excuse to do obviously illegal and immoral things.