You might want to let a jury consider the evidence, as we do in this legal system.
From the Police:
Police caution that although the 911 recording makes for provocative discussion, it fails to answer many questions they must try to answer: Was Horn on his property when he fired or had he ventured into the neighbor's yard? Were the suspects coming at him? Did he feel threatened?
The points you assert as "fact" are not decided yet.
I am in favor of vigorous self defense rights but it isn't clear that the conduct of this individual falls under that rubric.
Eye witness has vouched that they were going after the man, and he has not been charged with a crime. Prosecuting this man based on this in the courts serves no greater good, nor any form of justice.
Classifying this man an “murderer” for his actions is nonsense.
The criminals here lie dead, and their actions and decisions lead them to that place. They have no one to blame but themselves for their fate, and to suggest otherwise is just insanity.
No wonder liberals see the world upside down... some here are arguing the same logic.
If you read that quote carefully you'll see that it could not be determined by the audio recording. This story is out of date. It doesn't even mention the eyewitness corroboration.
It's been two weeks, if the police had any reason to believe Mr. Horn committed a crime, they'd have charged him. AFAIK, the case has not yet been presented to a grand jury, but most often in cases involving citizens killing persons committing crimes, the Grand Jury returns "No Bill", meaning they find insufficient evidence for an indictment. There isn't going to be any more evidence than already exists. I suspect the case will be taken to the next grand jury session.