From the looks of it, definitely seems like justifiable self defense.
But this part of ET_AL's article gave me pause:
"Rather than rush, Kleine said, they methodically broke down about five videos."
About? There had to be an estimation of how many videos were reviewed? Maybe less than five, maybe more than five, who knows? Right?! They're only criminal investigators, supposed to be paying attention to the most minute of details, yet they offer "We reviewed on or about, around five videos, but one can not be entirely sure when dealing with such a large number."
This is even more interesting when presented with the context of the father's suggestion that there was even more video evidence to consider.
I'm not saying this has anything to do with anything else, just found it interesting that including one five letter word can change the context of what was actually involved in their review. Should have just said "we reviewed five videos" and I would have said nothing.
Now, the rabbit hole deepens.