In my view, it is justified, but then I'm old school, meaning I remember when tazers didn't exist. Back then, you throw rocks at police, particularly when they aren't formed up in riot gear; you got shot.In the modern world, in which cops are supposed to runaway when confronted by a thug not wanting to be arrested; I would have to say if any of them had a tazer, it would probably been a good idea to use it rather than lethal fire power. After all, he was fairly well out numbered, and he could only hold so many rocks.Justified or not, the worse punishment should be administrative leave. He's throwing rocks, that's assault, response is self-defense.
Actually throwing the rocks can and will get you shot. Running away afterwards with your hands up is probably not justification for deadly force (that is where these cops are going to have a hard time explaining what they did). It is not self defense at that point. It would be different if he had a gun or knife in his hand, but it looks like (it is hard to tell) that he didn't even have rock in his hand. While cameras are not the be all end all of police work, they can often help show what happened. Both for and against the police, depending on the circumstances.
I had to stop Anonymous comments due to spam. But I welcome all legitimate comments. Thanks.