[urlhttp://youtu.be/qmK8Ify3vi8[/url]
Skip the first 20 seconds of the video. The DA's office concluded that officer Patrick Feaster negligently discharged his weapon, but decided not to charge the officer with criminal negligence because the DA did not believe he had sufficient evidence to satisfy the burden of proof. The officer acknowledged that he had been trained not to put his finger on the trigger until he formed the intention to fire and stated he never intended to fire. Given: (1) the officer acknowledged his training not to put his finger on the trigger until he formed the intent to fire, (2) he never intended to fire; and (3) he put his finger on the trigger, I think the DA probably had all the evidence he needed to prosecute. I'm not saying the DA should have prosecuted, I just don't buy his explanation for why he didn't prosecute. More information
here.