A cop shoots and kills a teenager. The community is outraged. The loudest voices in the crowd assumed the cop was wrong — he made an error in judgment.

Let’s take a look at the facts of the case:

There’s a disturbance at a notorious nightspot. By the time police get there a crowd of some 50 people has gathered. A 16-year-old boy has already fired one shot but so far nobody has been hurt.

The first cop to arrive hears the shot fired. The cop spots the armed youngster. The kid’s weapon is braced on the roof of a parked car. He’s aiming directly at the uniformed policeman.

There’s no time to negotiate. The cop draws his weapon and fires. In the blink of an eye the kid is dead.

The crowd claims the boy was never a threat to the officer. The cop, an 18-year veteran on the force, claims otherwise. How could authorities be certain of the facts reported? On this occasion the police forensic laboratory reveals the truth.

First, understand that during combat shootings a well-trained police officer nearly always "shoots directly at the threat."

That’s exactly what this officer did. He shot at the handgun leveled against him. A firearms expert examined the dead boy’s weapon and found marks of lead smeared along the top of the steel barrel. It was a trail of lead left by the cop’s single bullet.

That bullet, slightly deflected by the sight of the youth’s gun, hit the lad between the eyes. The kid shooter was set, aimed and ready to shoot. The cop responded as he was trained to do — by removing the threat.

The coroner’s jury and later a judge found the officer did no wrong.