We cant know what his employers would have thought about that altercation. I would imagine that anyone who knew him would have thought it was a bad idea and he was very lucky he didnt get arrested, that kind of behaviour will never help ones case.
I would like to point out though, that even in this incident, where AP was clearly very upset and agitated, and did behave badly, he still never has a hand on his gun. The agents in this incident were rightfully angry with his behaviour, and did tackle him, and yet he still walked away. He didnt threaten anyone and they didnt shoot him.
In my opinion, the only way this prior incident would have any bearing whatsoever on what happened on Saturday would be if those agents in the prior incident were the same ones who later killed him, in which case I would suggest that it was retaliation that got him killed and not his conduct on the day, which was nothing like it had been in the prior incident.
It doesn't matter how you spin it, they should not have shot him. He wasnt interfering in anything, he was helping a woman up, he wasnt threatening, he never made any moves that even suggested he was reaching for a concealed weapon, he posed no danger to the scrum if agents that piled on him. He was executed in the street. There is no justification for that.
Just another thought, even in a court case the defendants prior criminal history generally may not be used against them to determine guilt.
*NOT suggesting AP was a criminal, example for sake of argument.