Replies

Evidence of leaving a watched apartment complex with a big coat, if true, would have led me to question him the minute he was out of sight of the place so as not to compromise the investigation.

No it would have led you to question him in hindsight. Post facto judgements are meaningless. At the time of the incident, he was being surveilled, probably to see where he was going and who he was going to see. In other words the police had no idea what he was up to when he left the apartment and got on the bus. It was only after he began to behave strangely near the subway that the police moved and he ran. In other words the police did more less what you wanted them to do but since the result was bad the intention had to be bad as well in your eyes.

They shot him because they thought he had a bomb (their story). Did they start thinking that because he ran? If so, why don't they just have a bunch of guys in plainclothes with guns announce they are cops, and everyone has to freeze? See who runs. They have a bomb. If it is more than just the fact that he ran, they should have stopped him earlier. Why even give him the chance to run? That is their error (along with shooting an innocent man). And that is what cannot be explained away by the "heat of the moment." I appreciate your views, and have not meant to belabor the point as much as this. And of course suicide bombers are terrible. We hold Government employees with guns to a different standard, and have to.