Fact is, him being a cop should have no bearing on the matter.
Cops have no more right to use deadly force than anyone else.
Cops are consided equal to anyone else as far as the law was concerned.
Fact, just because you 'feel' threatened, doesnt give you the right to use deadly force.
If that was an ordinary citizen who shot the raker, he would have automatically been charged with manslaughter & it would have been up to a public prosecuter to make a case of it, & it would be then up to the jury to decide the guilt of the shooter. Why should cops be treated any differently if they are equal in the eyes of the law & have no more right to use deadly force than anything else?
Fact, there were 4 policemen attending at that time, if 4 cops can't deal with a matter like that without resorting to a gun, they shouldn't be cops. How do you think cops in the UK deal with a matter like that? They call for backup & try to talk him down (all while keeping at least a rakes distance from him & making sure all by standers are kept at least rakes distance from him too) & if they can't talk him down they use their battons - one distracts, then the rest tackle.
BTW Viper, have you ever considered the fact that the prosecuter might have information about the case unavaliable to you? Unless you know all the facts, how can you be so sure he shouldn't be charged.
What if a man with a hard criminal record a mile long, had shot your mother, because she waved a rake near him & he was feeling threatened, & all other circumstances were the same as the one above. Would you be so quick to deny the greeving family their day in court?
Really this all comes down to poor training. As cops in the UK cope ok with situations like this without resorting to the gun, because they are trained to cope in such situations without resorting to a gun. Maybe if that cop was trained in how to deal with situations like this without resorting to a gun, he wouldn't be going through the hell he's going through now.