Actually, I can (against an unarmed felon), in certain circumstances; but your contention was that the police could not. The case you cited does not say that. It gives the conditions when the police MAY use deadly force against an unarmed fleeing felon. The conditions are NOT limited to situations where the police feel they are in imminent risk.
Anyway, none of that is relevant to the situation being discussed in the case. I was just remarking about your credibility, in light of your false assertions (and now, moving goalposts, etc.)
No one’s moving goalposts here. Before you go running around questioning people’s credibility, you need to be informed or better yet spend some serious time reading relevant case law or have someone explain it to you. The whole point of my post was that unless one believes he is in danger of life or limb, the use of deadly force is unconstitutional when used by police, and subjects private individuals to wrongful death action. The Garner case illustrates this very well. When someone is FLEEING from you its an oxymoron to say that you are in danger of life or limb. This is not only elementary law, it is axiomatic fact.