Didn’t the article say the bullet that killed the thug also killed the lady after passing through the crazy thug?
Can’t see where the police officer should be sued for accidentally killing the lady. Seems like the family of the lady should sue the crazy thugs family for the death caused by the crazy thugs behavior.
From reading the article would you have the police officer get his head bashed in instead of taking a reasonable defense of life shot? Would you let some guy bash your head in without defending yourself? I think not.
He hit the target, killed the crazy thug. It is not like he missed and killed the lady through recklessness. A one-in-a-million pass-through shot killing an innocent lady is not reckless or criminal or a violation of civil rights.
The article I read stated that two rounds were glancing shots. There you go.
People are sued for causing accidents all the time. Think about someone who negligence might have caused a slip-and-fall accident, for example. Such a person would not be arrested, but he would be sued in civil court.
From reading the article would you have the police officer get his head bashed in instead of taking a reasonable defense of life shot?
I didn't read the article. That's why I made no comment on the legality of shooting baseball bat guy. But I guess if I were on a jury, it would all depend on how far away baseball bat guy was from the cop, if he was threatening the neighbor, and whether or not he was advancing towards the cop.