The police HAVE interviewed the good guy and are apparently sitting on his gun as evidence for the moment.
He just gave an interview with the paper to the same reporter that has seen the store's videotapes. The paper isn't releasing the guy's name, thank God.
In the interview he gives a detail not present in the VCDL account: once the goblin ran his gun dry (also a revolver) and clicked it a couple of times, the good guy stopped firing. THAT'S why he still had at least one round left (four shots fired). The goblin approached the counter area, wrestled with the good guy, tried to grab that Remmie, good guy retains control over it and beats the goblin upside the head - goblin tries to leave, collapses at the door.
It's apparently that period where the goblin is up and moving with a dry gun that the other people in the store urged some more action from that Remmie. And really, it would likely have been ruled justified under those circumstances if he had. Even a dry gun is an effective bludgeon and we know the goblin had murderous intent.
The key point here is that the good guy CHOSE not to keep firing. If the goblin had a speedloader and knew how to use it, he'd have been screwed but really, with this type of predator that's pretty unlikely and in any case he would have heard the "tinkle sound" of rounds dropping if the goblin had begun a reload.
http://www.timesdispatch.com/rtd/new...223008/280885/
So the Remmie didn't fail to fire, the good guy held fire. This to me absolutely seals the deal as far as this guy not getting charged. And while not totally tactically sound, holding fire once the goblin ran dry will likely help at least some with the post-shooting guilt syndrome...he was absolutely in the right the whole way and nobody will ever question that 'cept maybe the goblin's kin.