A “felony” or “high-risk” traffic stop occurs when police stop a vehicle which they have strong reason to believe contains a driver or passenger suspected of having committed a serious crime, especially of a nature that would lead the police to believe the suspects may be armed (such as an armed robbery, assault with a weapon, or an outstanding felony warrant for the registered owner). In a high risk stop, officers attempt to provide their own safety by issuing instructions to maintain absolute control over every step of the proceedings.
So why, after shooting Finicum in the back three times, did they start shooting at the vehicle ? Finicum was the one that was armed.
Those children weren't felons, they didn't have any guns.
He stopped when the trailing vehicle was pulled over. Had he disembarked from that vehicle, under those circumstances, he would likely have been shot then.
When (apparently) no one came up to his vehicle, he left the scene and proceeded, slowly at first, then picking up to highway speeds (55-60 mph, just going by the dashes in the road). When he came around the turn, there was a roadblock that he took the ditch to avoid.
The police stand in the way at those things, banking on people's instinct to NOT hit someone on foot with a vehicle, something as ingrained as trying to avoid hitting a deer, if not more so.
So Lavoy hit the ditch, missing the LEO, who apparently saw that Finnicum would not be able to stop in time, where it was pretty much guaranteed they were going to be stuck. (anyone who has driven in areas with a lot of snow will tell you that is the outcome to be expected, not going around a roadblock and back onto the road and continuing).
Were police shooting at the vehicle before it came to rest? If so, why? What actions by these people justified using potentially lethal force against them at that point?
What action justified shooting an old man in the back three times? Were those shots fired while he was standing (or attempting to do so--not easy in cowboy boots in deep snow) with his hands up? Why did fire continue at the vehicle after Finnicum had exited the vehicle? The windows were rolled up, and no one in the vehicle was able to shoot at the LEOs without breaking the windows. Again, how was the use of lethal force justified when there was no imminent threat?
The term for the actions of the LEOs in this instance is "bushwhacking". Otherwise known as an ambush.
The use of lethal force without justification is known as "murder".
The wrong people are being held.