[libstripper]

The video doesn’t actually show the officer aiming his weapon and firing it at the decedent. Rather, the decedent seems to come abreast of the officer, who is not in the frame, a flurry of shots is fired in a second or less, and the decedent drops. It does not appear that more shots were fired after he fell. That says the cop could have reasonably feared for his life and been justified in firing, the Illinois standard for use of lethal force being reasonable fear of death or Great bodily harm.

[Moonman62]

If the autopsy report showing the wounds has them numbered in the order of shots, then the first four bullets hit him in the front of his upper body, which would mean he had turned toward the accused. It will all come out at trial.

However, the press has already convicted the officer and the majority of his life is ruined regardless of the outcome.

[Springfield Reformer]

The video doesn’t actually show the officer aiming his weapon and firing it at the decedent. Rather, the decedent seems to come abreast of the officer, who is not in the frame, a flurry of shots is fired in a second or less, and the decedent drops. It does not appear that more shots were fired after he fell. That says the cop could have reasonably feared for his life and been justified in firing, the Illinois standard for use of lethal force being reasonable fear of death or Great bodily harm.

I disagree with your analysis on a number of points. First, the officers, when they are in the left edge of the video, are clearly aiming at the subject.  To accept your premise, one would have to assume they somehow decided to stop aiming right after they leave the image, and that would be most implausible.  

Furthermore, the subject's sudden turn to the left is accompanied by an upper body tilt backward, and the autopsy report shows three rounds hit his left arm and one hit his left chest. This is followed by a full spin then a limp collapse to the ground. Therefore it is plausible he did not even turn toward the officer until impacted by the munitions, leaving him in the resister category, not an aggressor.  

Additionally, if you watch the pavement behind and a little bit above him, after he has been downed, there are a number of small, distinct impact clouds resulting from gunfire.  I am not picturing how these are rounds that actually hit him, but as Van Dyke managed to leave 16 holes in him, it had to happen somehow, unless they came from other weapons, and we have no information to that effect.  Nevertheless, point is, yes, he was down, and still being fired upon.

As for " Illinois standard for use of lethal force being reasonable fear of death or Great bodily harm," that cannot be taken in isolation from the additional duties imposed on police officers, per training and policy, to minimize the use of lethal force where possible, and given the "totality of the circumstances," a "reasonable officer" more responsive to Chicago PD training and policy almost certainly could have avoided a shoot this problematic.

Peace,

SR