None of this had anything to do with facts, unfortunately.
I'm a big fan of holding police accountable for UOF, but "accountable" requires actually having facts in evidence before drawing conclusions. In general I don't see much of a proclivity in police officers to shoot people absent some sort of just cause. (Quite the opposite, in fact) It's certainly happened but those events tend to be fairly rare, at least in my recollection. When I heard the original "narrative" of this incident it sounded so utterly absurd as to beggar belief. I generally haven't found many police officers who deliberately murder surrendered individuals...especially on the street in front of a host of witnesses.
The facts, though, aren't important...the "narrative" is, and it's been a useful "narrative" for politicians with sagging poll numbers who made lots of promises, almost no deliveries, and need something to get solid voting blocks to the polls. That some cop in flyover country somewhere gets a public lynching (and yes, I use that term deliberately) in the effort is irrelevant. Omelette, eggs, bigger picture, FORWARD, etc.
I saw in the news today that our not-soon-enough-erstwhile attorney general, who has overseen breathtaking malfeasance, was complaining about the "selective leaks" coming out of the grand jury testimony. Deliberately trying to continue fanning the flames in the most cynical way imaginable.