We do not know all of the facts but there are numerous witnesses who say the cop's side of the story is untrue.
Having said that, I object to the following comment:
"if the cop was just being trigger happy than that family ought to get a nice settlement."
I have a very big problem with this line of thinking.
It implies a sort of cavalier indifference to the prospect of a wrongful shooting. When a cop shoots someone unjustifiably he is put on "administrative leave". He still collects his pay and will still collect a pension when he retires. On many cop talk forums it is a common joke that cops get a paid vacation when they shoot someone. I find it distasteful in the extreme. If the cop is found to be in the wrong he does not pay any of the "nice settlement". It is the taxpayers who pay! Would you care to tell the children of a deceased father that the world is right because even though they don't have a daddy anymore they got a "nice settlement"? Somehow I doubt they would be satisfied with that.
There is a pattern of behavior among some PPD officers wherein they routinely violate citizen's rights to carry firearms. There have been several recent incidents of unlawful behavior on the part of PPD which could have ended in this type of tragedy. The fact is that the mayor and city council as well as hierarchy of the PPD have an anti-gun agenda. The law is clear in PA that open carry is legal yet there are cops who disregard that fact. This incident may be the beginning of the end of that type of unlawful behavior on the part of some PPD officers. I hope so.