>

"if that's is really what happened" as if it it wasn't entirely on video or anything.
Headline's a bit misleading, Grand Jury will decide if charges are warrented, jury of peers will (if charges are filed) decide fate. >

I’m guessing they’ll recommend an indictment, he executed that man. You can’t claim to be defending yourself when the guy is on the ground with four rounds in him, and then you give the coup de grâce. >

I don't know, if I decided to shoot a guy I thought had a gun, I would probably keep pulling the trigger till it clicked. You sure don't want him getting back up. >

There's is a vast difference between pulling the trigger until the gun clicks and walking up to an unresponsive man and firing your last bullet into their brain matter. >

It puzzling to me how people can understand when a woman kills an abuser by stabbing him 100 times while terrified but somehow when a gun is involved they want to draw some imaginary line about when it’s proper to stop shooting. That man was dead the second he walked in that restaurant with his intentions, everything else is semantics >

The entire shooting process was less than half a minute. That will surely be the defence. That it was in fact one seamless action by a guy pumped up on adrenalin. Pausing for 6 or 7 seconds in the middle of that can still be sold as a continuous event. Time will tell. >

Yep. Heat of the moment. He won't be charged. "Your honor, I felt like this man was going to kill me or one of the children present. I was just trying to bring him down and save our lives. I don't know how many times I pulled the trigger, it's all a blur. I feel terrible that this man died, but in that moment I was only thinking of protecting myself and the innocent people in that room." >

And that is why I shot him a final time after I picked up his gun and inspected it, because the possibly dead guy might shoot someone with the gun he no longer has >

If that is really what happened, charges might be layed. The issue is all he has to do is say the guy moved or something, and he was still perceived as a deadly threat.
It’s the perception of the shooter in a self defense case that counts, not the reality of the situation.