Yep, it's ok as long as no one sees or hears. Feel free to move the body into the position needed and rearrange the crime scene as you see fit to corroborate your "story".

Well, at least, in this one the guy a: didn't get killed, and b: should make quite a bit of money on the lawsuit.

As I suggested in my comment there, when the non-warrior-type instructors tell folks to avoid holding somebody at gunpoint, we do have reasons.

Wow. Minus several points for Phoenix as a retirement destination.

Wow! That sounds like a nightmare from hell.

Hopefully, he'll end up owning the department alongside a hefty amount of dollars.

I teach students, when confronted with a surrendering subject, to say "GET OUT OF HERE, THE POLICE ARE ON THE WAY" and then position themselves so the subject has a clear exit path away from them. I also teach them how to greet the police in a non-threatning manner.

In this particular case, the police didn't even see the homeowner's gun before they shot him, so I'm not convinced any of that would make a difference. Overall, a terrible mess.

It might not have made a difference if the police had been told that the robber was fleeing down the street rather than being held at gunpoint in the house, sure. But there's only so much one can do about Bad Cop Stuff, after all; if, upon being told that a robber is fleeing from a house, the cops enter the house and start shooting people, there's nothing much to be done about it.

Some people just shouldn't be trusted with guns.

About five years ago, I assisted with training an unnamed local SWAT team. Roleplaying in an active shooter scenario, I stood, unarmed, in one corner of a 10x10' room with my gun lying on a table in the opposite corner, well out of reach. As the officer entered, I put my hands up and yelled "Don't shoot, I give up!" he responded by shooting me in the belly with his M4.

I have absolutely no problem with your scenario. In general, I'm in favor of training scenarios in which cops can screw up and shoot the wrong person.

The more cops who make this sort of mistake in training, where no one gets hurt, the fewer who are likely to make this sort of mistake on the street.

Yeah, but did the evaluators decide it was a mistake?

At first take, flippant. Upon reflection...

It wasn't just a cheap shot -- was the response from the trainer "Well, that's a flunk," or "Nice job -- you've gotta make sure you go home that night"? I'd like to think it was the first, but . . .

Good. Some of the warrior-type instructors spend a lot of time on subjects like How to Hold a Subject at Gunpoint, to the exclusion of Only a Moron Holds a Guy at Gunpoint if He Doesn't Have to, and Here's How Not to Do That Stupid Thing, which, in my considered opinion, is a far more useful skill (and an easier one) for civilian permit holders.