I’m going to take a different tack with you: why are you worried about fault? Let’s just assume that the off-duty cop is at fault. Where are you going with it? Please don’t tell me that the operative difference is between governmental, and non-governmental employees “at fault.”
I can actually see that this guy may have been even more justified in defending himself, as he was off-duty and out of uniform. As another poster said, if you get into an accident or injure a pedestrian in certain parts of certain towns, and you happen to be the wrong color, your life could be in immediate danger from the get-go.
It is NOT an unheard of experience for people to be beaten by a mob because of a “disrespectful look”, never mind a fender-bender or actual physical injury.
Why are you interested in justifying a government employee (relevant because were he a non-government employee, he would not have people justifying him on the basis of his occupation.
What is important is that a four year old was victimized, twice.
For one, the officer here, as far as we know, has not been charged with “failure to maintain control of a motor vehicle”.
The prosecuting attorney would surely hit that charge (among others) on any non-government employee who struck the child.