Well, that's certainly a compelling case put together by the DA.
I still argue that even if legal, the two guys shouldn't go chasing after someone who committed a crime as they aren't police, aren't in the best shape, seemingly lack decent training, and aren't wearing armor. They also don't appear to have any means of easily restraining someone, should that become necessary. Just not the best idea.
Is it a legal shoot? Maybe?
is it a preventable shoot? Absolutely.
It seems to me that they could have followed and done just what the third guy behind them did: record the guy on video. He wasn't ducking behind bushes or vaulting fences, he was just going along the street. They may be able to find legal justifications for the criminal aspect, but it sure is a textbook case for why it's not smart to intervene with guns over something like that.