Three pages and not once has anyone bothered to ask what the physical details of the shooting actually were.
How far apart was the officer and the suspect? Where was the bystander in relation to the others? Where did the fired rounds impact? What was the time frame involved in the shooting? How many people were in the area when it occurred? What was the backstop visible to the officer when he fired?
Trying to evaluate the appropriateness of someone's actions without the mechanics of what they actually did, only the outcomes, is like judging the performance in a race by looking only at the scores. Results matter, but they aren't the sole source of meaning. Plenty of people, officers and armed civilians alike, have gotten into shootings that were utterly idiotic, and nothing came of it because no one was hurt. Plenty of people, officers and armed civilians alike, have taken action in times and places where no reasonable person standing there could disagree with what they did. Regardless, it's incredibly rare that people reading the news have the ability or opportunity to accurately judge the totality of the situation from the information they're given, and their own subject matter experience.