Without having read such a police report, I would not give it the degree of credibility that you seem to impart to it. The cops don't want to be involved in these things, and the guy gave them an explanation good enough that they felt they could wash their hands of the affair.
I don't consider such a thing dispositive on the face of it.
I have investigated cases where the police had several previous reports of problems from a dog or dog, which they took into consideration when the dog was finally shot.
And this is the normal methodology in my experience. Aggressive dogs get picked up by the Animal shelter after repeated offenses. The owner gets hauled in front of a judge and then ordered to comply or the dog gets destroyed.
The owner(s), when self-reporting on the Internet, never mentioned all the problems their dog(s) were previously involved in.
We have no knowledge of previous offenses by this dog. If there are any, this mitigates what the man did. Are you aware of information regarding this dog's past aggressive behavior?
Yes, we have more than one man's word. We have the police who investigated, conclusion the shooting was self-defense.
Again, I toss that out without any consideration unless it has details in the actual report which better explain the circumstances.
Just alleging that the police didn't want to mess with it is not proof of anything. The police often don't want to mess with domestic headaches and would rather get back in their car and leave.
My experience is the opposite. Police often go out of their way to side with the wealthy and famous. The wealthy and famous often are careful to generously contribute to things like local police charities.
The fact the police in this case are willing to take the side of a delivery driver against a wealthy and famous resident is telling.
This is not a domestic case. The driver is not related to Angie Harmon.