I think they were in the right to fire the first time(s) as he was a threat to them, threw a weapon towards them, and continued to challenge them. Cops can't take chances that someone MIGHT NOT kill them. If you're an actual threat to a cop who has their gun drawn on you, cops are trained to shoot to kill in response. I'm surprised they fired warning shots instead of just shooting him in the chest tbh. Seems they went against their likely training and were compassionate, trying to let him live.
But after he had turned to run away from them? They shot him in the back.. he was no longer a threat to their lives. That would likely be considered excessive force and the cop who shot him could even face criminal charges for shooting him.
So, IMO, the cops went from in the right to shoot to kill to in the wrong because the guy was no longer a threat to them when they shot him.
_________________
No

for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.