The law only allows deadly force if a person’s life is in *immanent* danger. The cops were not in immanent danger. Regardless of what you believe to be the case, killing a suspect under these circumstances was illegal. It doesn’t matter what you think of the guy or what you believe to be his crimes, the job of the police is to bring a suspect in for trial not to exact revenge for their fallen comrades.
The word is "imminent" and anytime you are in a gun battle/firefight, you are in imminent danger.
Are you nuts? The perp had shot and killed one deputy and wounded another AT THAT CABIN. He was still shooting and trying to get away.
I don't know on what planet a running firefight does not represent imminent danger, but it sure as heck isn't the one I am on.
Care to reconsider that ludicrous claim?
Those rounds are thought to have caused Dorner to crash his truck. He was forced to bail out and flee on foot to a nearby cabin.
It was there that heavily-armed SWAT officers from the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department - including McKay and Collins - engaged the former U.S. Navy Reserve lieutenant in a running gun battle.
KCAL-TV captured terrifying footage of officers taking cover and firing into the cabin. Hundreds of rounds could be heard.
As the battle unfolded, Dorner tossed a smoke grenade and tried to escape out the back door of the structure.
After shooting McKay and Collins, other officers - armed with M4 military assault rifles and Ruger Mini 14 semiautomatic carbines, drove him back inside.
---------
So McKay was killed and Collins was wounded during the firefight, when Dorner was trying to escape. Do you SERIOUSLY wish to continue your opinion that a prolonged siege and firefight with a crazed killer trying to escape did not represent imminent danger?