The court heard evidence from a lot of people, not just the police
I didn't say they were angels. I didn't say they didn't make a mistake. They shot a man who was at the time, unarmed.

What matters, as to whether it's lawful, is whether it was reasonable to presume he was armed, thus making any gesture such as reaching inside a jacket, a potential threat.

You're the police. You knew he started off with a gun. You didn't see him throw the gun. I don't think it's too unreasonable to assume he's probably still got a gun.

Edit: "who, of course, closed ranks and supported one another" ? You've got actual evidence of that? Who's making up things to suit their prejudices now?
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:30, 1 reply, 11 years ago)

or another gun in a different pocket
or a mate with a gun. or a knife.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 15:31, Reply)

That's not a knife.

( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Thu 9 Jan 2014, 16:00, Reply)