"...Witnesses told police that the would-be robber had come into the cafe wielding a gun and tried to steal from the business and the customers, police said..."
Hmm. Given these two statements from the article, this is odd. I know you must gauge the circumstances very carefully, but this seems entirely justified if the robber was wielding a gun.
I hope the reporter just got this wrong, or this is a case of liberalism gone awry...again. But, if recent news stories have any truth, there seems to be a percentage of "black lives matter" idiots in that area, and if the robber was black, this is their way of trying to show those morons that the police are not "jumping to conclusions".
Stupid either way.
It’s just semantics. Either way, it’s a “homicide” which is just latin for the killing of a human being. The only thing which remains to be seen is whether or not it’s considered lawful or unlawful. Based on the story, I’m leaning toward lawful.
CC
In cause-of-death terminology typically used by medical examiners, the term “homicide” merely means the death of one human as a result of the actions of another, as distinguished from “suicide” or death by some other cause. It doesn’t necessarily imply murder or criminal intent.