It is called a “Officer Involved Critical Incident Update.”

It might as well as have been a posting of the “Ma & Pa Kettle Go to Town” vintage black and movie as far as the flash jury on social media is concerned.

The Manteca Police Department, in the interest of “transparency and accountability”, posted the video updating the public in regards to the fatal officer involved shooting of 69 year-old Charles Craig Megonegal on April 30 at the Manteca In-N-Out Burger parking lot.

It was posted Friday evening. As of Monday afternoon, it had received 632 views.

It is in stark contrast with video and the accompanying commentary from smartphone footage posted and reposted on so-called “influencer” social media accounts in the same time frame after the actual shooting that garnered in excess of 100,000 views.

Other people are aware of the MPD update video that was reported Friday evening on various Sacramento TV stations.

But the reporting didn’t come with instant commentary as those that fancy themselves as purveyors of the truth on social media.

Police don’t have the luxury of sitting on the sidelines, not being forced into instantaneous decisions, or issuing assertions without having it based on “facts” and being weighed against circumstances, and whatever potential scenarios are queued up in terms of harm to others, the suspect, and officers.

It’s “facts” because what one sees may be factual such as an officer firing several shots into a white van as you record it on your cellphone but it lacks context.

In the case of one social media influencer narrating the clip, it was proof positive of trigger happy cops committing cold-blooded murder.

There were even TikTok users hours after the shooting claiming it was another example of police using any excuse to shoot people of certain skin tones.

That ignores a little detail. The driver was a 69 year-old white man.

Manteca Police Chief Stephen Schluer narrates the 18 minute and 59 second video update of an investigation he points out is still active. Schluer also promised more updates as the investigation proceeds

The police chief pointed out a fact that was ignored or considered too inconsequential for most so-called legacy media and others to point out.

The California Department of Justice had determined Megonegal had used his vehicle in such a manner it met the legal threshold of being used as a deadly weapon.

That means it is now up to San Joaquin County District Attorney Ron Freitas to determine, based on facts gathered by his investigators, whether it was a justified shooting.

Comments posted immediately in the aftermath critical of police ran the gamut from officers could have used a taser to the assertion officers’ lives were never in danger.

That assumes police had complete control of the situation. They didn’t.

It also assumes they could have allowed the driver to turn the parking lot into an impromptu one-man demolition derby and potentially get onto to city streets.

An exaggeration? Who knows what was going on in the driver’s mind.

But if that had happened and someone had gotten hurt, severely crippled for life or dead the endless pit of self-righteousness the Internet echo chamber has evolved into would have gone ballistic for police not preventing it from happening.

Officers have to deal with the known as well as the unknown.

They also have the right to go home to their families alive and/or not severely injured.

I know. I know.

We don’t know that the driver would have done anything but to keep ramming vehicles in the parking lot until he tired of it and gave up.

Look at the update video.

It included video footage from body cameras, dash cameras, In-N-Out Burger security cameras, and a drone. It isn’t just a 20 second video clip filmed from the comfort and secure vantage point of a car a significant distance away.

You can debate a lot of aspects in the time honored pastime of Monday morning quarterbacking.

But there are more than a few things that have little, if any, room for debate.

*The driver was clearly aggressive and agitated before police arrived.

*Officers worked to try and de-escalate the situation.

*They kept the tone of exchanges with the driver even-keeled and calm.

*They never forced the driver into any course of action.

Some of the comments on social media the day of the shooting and even a post on the police department’s Facebook page tagged to the update video, alluded to the fact officers did not warn bystanders to step back before they opened fire.

There is a point where bystanders have a bit of responsibility.

As the video shows, there were a number of officers with weapons drawn in the parking lot for a good 18 minutes.

If any In-N-Out employees were looking out windows or onlookers told to stay behind police lines had somehow wiggled past them and ended up getting hit when officers opened fire, they put themselves in a dangerous environment.

The most blatant Manteca example of the public being clueless or believing they shouldn’t steer away from situations where officers have guns drawn, happened in 2005 not far from the In-N-Out Burger.

It was along the main driveway at the entrance to the nearby Home Depot.

Manteca Police had tracked a known gang-member who was a suspect in a drive-by shooting just days earlier on Moffat Boulevard where bullets missed the head of a 6 year-old girl by inches.

There were no less than six officers with guns drawn along with community service officers working to keep people out of harm’s way  in the quickly unfolding situation.

One couple, with a child in tow, walked calmly toward the incident as officers yelled at them to get back.

A community service officer finally caught up with them.

Their response when they were asked what were they thinking?

It was along the line “we had shopping to do and we didn’t think it was anything serious.”

Police need to be under the looking glass.

But that doesn’t include bystanders becoming part of the situation that officers are trying to diffuse.

What happened in the In-N-Out Burger parking didn’t unfold in seconds. Those bystanders perceived to have possibly been in danger by social media posters had more than enough time to not be in danger if indeed that was ever the case.

Nor was it a trigger happy response of police.

It is now up to the process of piecing together assorted “facts” and how they stack up against the need to make sure things didn’t escalate in an even different manner that what actually  happened.

The bottom line is whether the action of Manteca Police was reasonable and justified.

Keep in mind the State of California — that is no shrinking violet when it comes to giving those that act in a criminal manner a lot of latitude — has determined the driver was indeed using his vehicle in a manner that meant he was essentially armed with a deadly weapon.

Rest assured social media influencers with an anti-police bent won’t be posting any videos to that effect.

You don’t get many likes in the bowels of the Internet if you don’t pay blind allegiance to preconceived narratives.

This column is the opinion of editor, Dennis Wyatt, and does not necessarily represent the opinions of The Bulletin or 209 Multimedia. He can be reached at dwyatt@mantecabulletin.com