No of course not, which is why I've never argued that SYG should be invoked as grounds against against any charges. In fact I have repeatedly said the facts of the case as reported would strongly suggest second degree murder and would even suggest second degree murder being significantly more likely to secure conviction. I'm arguing SYG law would, in Florida, constitute what I believe you call an affirmative defence or mitigating circumstance that would ultimately undermine the first degree murder charge. In that Mr Dunn used lethal force because he believed it legally appropriate as a response to the level of threat he felt; rightly or wrongly. Again, because I feel this point has been drowned out; I think the man is guilty of second degree murder. I stated his use of force was disproportionate and I stand by that. You seem to be taking a Wocky approach of confusing "it's murder but not first degree murder" with "he's innocent!" Not at all, Jello, and just to ensure he hasn't assumed mind control over you can you please summarise back to me the mitigating circumstance argument I just made? Because at the end of the day, four kids were attacked but one died and somehow the prosecutor was allowed to try and redeem itself for the Trayvon Martin case by elevating one to me a more significant target than the others (target and victim are not the same thing here). It's politicising a person's death and trying to overcompensate for the Zimmerman acquittal's public backlash being put ahead of actual justice. Ironically, that over-reaching ambition means Davis may not get justice if they can't get a retrial. You're the lawyer, Jello - if you had to push for first- or second-degree murder for Jordan Davis' death, what would you have gone for?