I think there’s enough stuff up in the air on this that I wouldn’t rely too much on specialized knowledge.
Supreme Court had a case last January that overruled what I thought the standard was when I started posting in this thread. They also declined to get into officer-created-dangers, so that’s still an open question, (but this isn’t the case I’d want to champion if I were trying to sell the Supreme Court on that).
Minnesota has a statute that was briefly discussed. Likely none of us really knows how that works in practice. The question of if it can even be applied to this guy is “probably not,” but it’s way more complicated than that.
Whether shooting a car is an objectively reasonable response is probably a valid question, but that’s been affirmed before.
I know two things: 1. I’ve seen more ****ed up shootings that got an acquittal and 2. perceiving a car moving towards you as a deadly threat is about as objectively reasonable as it gets. Nothing about the totality of the circumstances changes that in my mind.