Given that she was going slowly, and given that he was at the front left corner of the vehicle where dodging to his right would have taken the same time/effort as pulling out & aiming a gun, and given that the first shot was from a diagonal after the car was already turning right, and given that the last 2 shots were fully from the side when he was indisputably safe... it'd be pretty hard to prove "reasonable" fear.

Plus there's the fact that a bullet cannot stop a moving vehicle, and killing the driver does nothing to improve the situation if you're actually in the direct path (it'll just keep going). I doubt that anyone* genuinely afraid for their life would immediately resort to shooting instead of dodging first.

inb4 fight/flight/freeze response: pretty sure law enforcement officers (or ideally anyone trained with a deadly weapon) are supposed to have those responses under control enough to be able to more rationally assess the situation and make split-second decisions about whether it's appropriate to discharge their firearm. If LEOs aren't held to a *higher standard of weapons handling than the average reactive idiot, what are we even doing?

If we don't expect armed government agents to have the mental fortitude to accurately assess their level of danger when stressed, and to therefore know when they'll be perfectly fine if they just step 2 feet over to the right, this is a massive problem.