'I' might have handled it differently but that shoot was justified, she presented a threat.

Sorry, pal, this some of the most nonsense horse shit I've read in a looooooong time. What threat did she present? To whom? With what?

Shooting somebody, without a weapon is, to those in the know, MURDER.

She disregarded orders from armed officers to cease her attack and refused

OK, let's shoot everybody in the back who . doesn't follow a cops orders. Problem solved.

Oh, one other thing: Did she even hear the orders? Did she know it was directed at her?

at that moment the officers had to assume she had some mission

Had to?? Are you fucking high?? "Mission"??? GTFO!

assume...she had some bomb or weapon or agenda, and when she breached the inner room yeah she was shot.

Had to assume a bomb or weapon....I like that. Or, why not have to assume that she was unarmed, as in fact, she WAS UNARMED!

HAD TO?? HAD TO?? Nobody even saw a weapon there, so, it was idiotic to assume bomb or weapon. Even if there were thousands of weapons there, to kill her, without her having a weapon, or one of your bombs, is murder. Cops are not to fire helter skelter into crowds.

or agenda

I like that. Let's shoot a person in the back with an agenda.

breached the inner room

You mean, 'got in'?

Even the wretched SCOTUS, before they became possessed, ruled that it is unjustified to take a life without the reasonable threat of death or grievous injury.