[Ranxerox]

...But once the man is down with bullets in him he's no longer a threat. There's a difference between using deadly force to defend yourself and killing a man in the process, and killing him out of anger even though he's no longer a threat...

You're making many assumptions here that aren't necessarily valid. A "man down with bullets in him" doesn't mean he is no longer a threat. For example, how would I know he doesn't have a concealed weapon on him that he could pull when my guard is down? Did I hit the intruder? I have seen people miss a 30" x 30" paper target from 20 feet away, under optimal conditions, never mind a stressful encounter with a possibly armed intruder. Also, I have shot a deer with a 12 ga. slug that did nothing more than look up before trotting off 50 yards and collapsing. I have also completely missed a deer that fell down from the noise, then jumped up when I approached him and ran off. The point is that assessing a threat is not as cut and dried as you make it out to be. Ask those cops in New York who shot that fellow 41 times for pulling out his wallet if they thought he was still a threat.

[RonF]

I'm not making any assumptions. Yet. What I'm saying is that the statements that the dead man was shot 11 times, 5 times in the back, can be interpreted in different ways depending on the existence of different scenarios, a couple of which I describe. I don't assume any of them are true, I'm saying that the story as given doesn't allow for a determination of whether what happened was purely self-defense or whether vengance was also involved. I've also asked for further information to clarify the issue.

I should think that the report that the dead man was shot 5 times in the back should at least raise questions, and that's what I'm doing.