Just compare this shooting to the last self-defense shooting that generated this much activity here on FR: Kyle Rittenhouse.
A 17-year-old with a semi-automatic rifle demonstrated FAR more situational awareness and self-control than this guy. EVERY shot of his was measured, reasonable, and completely justifiable.
If that kid had been given half the leeway that people here are giving Baldy, he could have perforated half of the crowd around him with nary a complaint here.
But he would almost certainly be behind bars for the rest of his life.
I know it's easy to judge this in hindsight, but I think that last shot is going to be problematic for the shooter.
You said,
"...but I think that last shot is going to be problematic for the shooter."
I remember when subway defender in NYC, Bernie Goetz shot a guy in the back after the attacker was already down on the floor. Even that shot did not convict Goetz in New York. Goetz was convicted of a weapons violation. Mas Ayoob said of the incident that Goetz's attorney being an idiot, refusing to listen to Ayoob's advice, could have used a winning strategy to get him off even for that charge.
In considering my response, please understand that in my mind there is an important distinction between the actual disposition of such cases and the words spoken by attorneys and prosecutors during trial. You are absolutely right that some prosecutor will say whatever they want about that last shot. I will say that the jury will ignore it. Mas Ayoob will agree with you and say that it is important what these lawyers say. I disagree but you may be right as anything can happen in a jury room. Bernie missed one shot of five and because it ricocheted, it became the basis of a reckless endangerment charge. Pure stupidity by the prosecutor and the jury completely disregarded it.