It should though - because the obligation is to the law and not ethics. While it is certainly messed up morally and a reflection of twisted norms there is a point about social contracts and expectations. One can argue it is wrong for a bystander to lock and bar the door in a mass shooting or not attempt an ambush of a shooter as they got closer but there is no expectation to risk their life like that and such outside demands of bravado would be wrong. Unreasonable demands make a parody of justice no matter the potential outcome.
That said it is possible for multiple people to be in the wrong in multiple dimensions and there is room for nuance. Robbing a bank is wrong, but doing so when under duress saying that the robber should be punished would be wrong but not if they were instead tasked to outright murder.
Maybe your obligation is to the law but that doesn't mean everybody else should be. The law of the US is corrupt and immoral in countless ways. Anybody who is "law abiding" and nothing else is corrupt to the core.
That said it is possible for multiple people to be in the wrong in multiple dimensions and there is room for nuance. Robbing a bank is wrong, but doing so when under duress saying that the robber should be punished would be wrong but not if they were instead tasked to outright murder.