The somewhat bizarre legal conclusion was that the police failed to announce themselves, therefore the homeowner was shooting at them in lawful self-defense, yet the police were also shooting back in lawful conduct of their duties because they had a valid warrant.
In my opinion, they really should not have been able to get a no-knock warrant on the extremely tenuous evidence they had, and so the rightful blame is divided between the judge who issued the no-knock warrant on shaky evidence and the police who sought the no-knock warrant on shaky evidence. However, I accept that with the laws as written, that blame does not translate to legal culpability.
I think it's entirely reasonable for the public to be upset that an innocent woman was gunned down in her own home, and all the justice system pretty much said, "Too bad."
It's a legally correct decision, but I don't think it's outrageous to be pissed about it, nor do I think it's entirely knee-jerk to blame the police, because the undisputed bottom line is that they're the ones who made the bad decisions which set this entire tragedy in motion.