the officers involved will give statements, i'm sure. and civilian eyewitnesses, if located, may give statements.

we don't know the whole story yet.

>Also, you can't tell me that the only training they receive
>the one that directs them to shoot.

i can't. but i've deposed police on this issue and they've told me that they are authorized to shoot in a situation like this. generalized beat cops, i mean. officers may have specialized training that goes beyond the general training - i dunno what special training could've applied here. i dunno if the department at issue has any specially trained officers on staff or if any were on duty on the day at hand. i dunno that any were on the scene here.

but the story i read in the OP comports w/what i've found when i've worked on police brutality cases. in a situation like this the officers are taught to give a command and any movement other than the commanded one can be considered an act of aggression - considering the subject is armed and dangerous (report was that he was pointing a weapon at bystanders). officers are taught to assume the weapon is real even if a report says it could be fake. until they can confirm the weapon is fake they treat it as real. this is to protect the officers' safety and that of the public, including the subject.