To justify the use of lethal force, the shooter would have to demonstrate that he knew there were others that were in imminent danger and needed to be defended. Not just some vague "hunch".
Otherwise, any cop would be "justified" to shoot anyone who was fleeing in the back, under the premise that they thought the victim/"suspect" was going to go off and harm someone else. Even when no one else was around.
"I had a feeling there might be someone else down the street that needed defending" is hardly an acceptable excuse to take someone's life.
Try presenting this kind of defense to a jury while they view pictures of a mother who had a collection of her kid's stuffed animals hanging out of the glove box. Good luck with that.
Surely, it is very likely that this will be the defense of this murderer. But at best it will only mitigate the charge of murder to one of a lesser degree. It will not exonerate him.
Any defense attorney is going to advise him to take the most favorable plea deal offered; in order to claim self-defense or the defense of others, the shooter will have to take the stand and any prosecutor is going to absolutely destroy him.
= new reply since forum marked as read