Curious that you would characterize this as an accident.
I don’t know the hearts of these men, so given the facts they have presented in the article, I interpret them as “humanly” as possible. By that interpretation, the police truly felt they were in danger, and fired in self-defense.
If their police force had a “no shooting at cars” rule, they would be guilty of breaking that rule. If they didn’t, and instead had a rule that they were allowed to shoot at a fleeing car if they thought they were in danger, we certainly could interpret what we see on the tape as allowing them to think they were in danger.
I don’t believe the police officer who wasn’t run over was shooting at the guy simply because he felt like killing an innocent bystander.
So, if we assume they didn’t mean to kill an innocent, that would classify the shooting as an “accident”, the same way that a police officer shooting a child with a toy gun that looks real could be considered an “accident”.