“...and so he shot their dad in the same vehicle the children were in. I’m sure those children really appreciate this deputy’s concern. Why didn’t the deputy prevent this guy from walking (not running) back to his car in the first place?”
Finally, the right question. Why indeed? Was a Taser avaliable? Where was the deputy standing relative to the driver? At what point was he aware that the children were in the car?
There’s too much fog, too little facts available in the media to answer any of those questions. This could either be a justified, though tragic use of force, or criminal incompetence. Can’t tell from the information present.
But you’re asking the right question.
There is no fog here. This is not a complex incident.
Why not just ask the deputy involved or the teenagers in the vehicle?
Why is there suddenly a different version of events? OCSD originally stated the deputy feared for his life. Days later, the deputy now feared of the kids in the vehicle?
Tell me, after about a week, how is it possible the OCSD spokesperson has no idea if the passengers versions of events is or is not consistent with the deputy's version?
How is that possible?
There is no fog here.
This is not a complex incident. All the players are accounted for. No?
Why would you think this is so complex?
Why not just ask the deputy involved or the teenagers in the vehicle?
Why is there suddenly a different version of events?
OCSD originally stated the deputy feared for his life. Days later, the deputy now feared of the kids in the vehicle?
Hows that work?
Tell me, after about a week, how is it possible the OCSD spokesperson has no idea if the passengers versions of events is or is not consistent with the deputy's version?
How is that possible?
I could not help but notice you evaded most of the questions here.