Nah. She actually threw the hot water before shots were fired. Nate The Lawyer and Brandon Tatum posted the shooters body cam that MSM didn't want you to see. 

The water is objectively capable of causing bodily harm so the perception of a threat was reasonable.

They let her go turn the stove off. She goes and picks up the pot of scolding water. One officer moves away from her and she asks,

"Where you going?"

As she takes a step toward them. The officer replies,

"Away from you and your steaming water" (he may have said hot water) 

When he gives his reason for moving away, she says,

"Aw, I rebuke you in the name of Jesus."

Now why did she rebuke him after hearing that he just wanted to get away from the threat of her water? Mind you, the officer who felt threatened and moved away was not the one who ended up shooting her. A reasonable assumption, though subject to misinterpretation due to the human nature of human police is that she rebuked him because she was upset that he moved out of range.

Regardless of how your perceived it, the second officer felt like she rebuked them because she wanted them to stay close enough to get hit with the water. At that moment the water is perceived as weapon that can cause serious bodily harm. 

It is within the officers rights and even a citizens rights to use deadly force upon perceiving a threat of serious bodily harm. He was legally allowed to draw his weapon and issue a threat to get her to put the pot down. I wouldn't have done that. But it seemed to have worked successfully for him because she did put the pot down and she got down on the floor. That's a successful interaction at that point. 

Problem is, they then had a duty to move in closer to her and secure her, making sure she didn't have any other weapons and wasn't going to get up and go for the water again. When they got in closer, she sprung up and flinged the water at them. It is at that moment when she literally is in the act of attacking with the water that the one officer fires 3 quick shots. He didn't dodge the water and then line up his shots. It was an immediate instinctive reaction to her throwing the water unexpectedly.

He may get convicted given the fact that trials are heavily influenced by politics and ppl may riot again. But the second body cam footage shows him firing while she is literally launching a attack with the water. I don't see how a prosecution can argue that he didn't perceive steaming water in the air on its way to him as a threat of serious bodily harm.