It'd probably be different if they tried to apply some real forensics in the investigation. Forensics is perfect as long as there is evidence to find and people competent enough to find it. If there isn't any evidence, then congratulations, perfect crime.
I have a morbid fascination for that show of yours, COPS. Or "police brutality hour" as I like to call it. Some of the cases on that show are so blatant that I'm surprised it went on the air. Of course, you have a fucked up crime situation and so there's plenty of source material. A norwegian channel recently started shooting a norwegian version of COPS. The contrast was ... stark. "Tonight on Norwegian COPS ... the police has to respond to an epileptic seizure at the town square!"
Yeah.

Yeah, way to make yourself sound educated and informed...
COPS is not indicative of the average police officer. It would be like assuming every single african american family needs to use fifty paternity tests to figure out who the father of a child is, or that every french girl tends to take off all her clothes before she washes a car for the "stuntman" in a given film. :p
And contrary to popular belief (I blame CSI. mostly because I prefer NCIS anyway ;p), forensics is NOT the be-all-end-all of investigation. From what I skimmed of the wiki page on that guy, there WAS some evidence to suggest an accelerant was not used (admittedly, it was inconclusive). But the problem was, there was inconclusive evidence in a case with investigators of dubious quality.

Most places have this or something similar on the books - so yes infact you do.
Obedience to police and fire department officials.
No person may willfully fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order or direction of a police
officer or firefighter.

You are correct - the emphasis is on "Lawful Order"
But also "direction"

Lawful order or lawful direction, call it whatever you want. The bottom line is, as I already stated, that police may issue certain orders and directives as part of their job, and people are lawfully required to follow these, but the police do not have carte blanche to issue whatever orders they feel like. There's plenty of legislation and case law on this you can look up if you don't want to take my word for it.

I think you misunderstand because I agree with you and no one thinks they have carte blanche to issue whatever orders they feel like.

And I fully agree. They don't have carte blanche.
But please, tell me, what is wrong with being ordered to get back in your car?
There are grey and black areas, no doubt about it. But what the hell is wrong with a cop telling you to get back in your vehicle (assuming it isn't on fire)?
Yes, you have the right to disobey an order from an officer of a law that you feel endangers you. But an officer of the law also has the right to use force to enforce those laws. So much as an officer of the law will be held accountable if force is misused, you too will be held accountable if you disobey a lawful order.

Frankly, I find it amusing to see Americans arguing that they aren't free because the police has too much power and laws are too harsh.
In France, the police is technically allowed to take anyone off the street and keep them in jail for 72 hours without charging them with anything. And when I mean anyone, it means that they don't even need a reason, except that you look suspicious.
That's much more power than any US cop's ever had. They just never use it, because they would get ripped apart by the media if they did.
Those are laws that were passed after a wave of terrorist attacks in the 90s, and they were never repealed afaik.
I haven't studied the law extensively, but I believe the differences between punishments in French and US law aren't that big either, except for drug possession and most sex crimes.
So why are there more people in jail in the US than in France? It's simple, it's because the overall attitude towards the law is very different.
If a law enforcement officer does something that belongs to the "grey area" in the US, from my impressions, there will about as many people defending him (or her) as condemning him. In France, he'll be universally condemned.
In the same way, there are judges in America who will be harsher than the law, others who will be more lenient. In France, ALL of them are more lenient, except on some specific stuff (pedophilia, etc...).
So most minor felonies that would get punished with a light jail sentence in the US will be turned into a fine or even an acquittal in France, and I assume in most of Europe.
That's the main explanation, I think for the different incarceration rates. it certainly doesn't mean that US citizens are less free than Europeans.

Here's a verdict recently where police officer is charged with what's perceived as a 'light' sentence of manslaughter. I think our Missouri friend ought to be charged with this for shooting his wife AT LEAST!
This officer probably should be held longer for his accident. Can't confuse your gun for your tazer! They predicted a public riot, so he must have a guardian angel in the court
[url=]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rich-silverstein/bart-shooting----peeling_b_641304.html[/url]

Or a judge/jury who only considered the law, and not public opinion.
I don't know all the details, but that seems like pretty much textbook involuntary manslaughter. Did not intend to kill the guy, but did anyway. Hence, involuntary and manslaughter.