I don't know but this doesn't sound right. Maybe he was acquitted because of the deadly force law, but his lawyers were arguing both the deadly force law and a lack of intent. It wouldn't surprise me if the real issue was prosecutorial overreach. If they only charged him with murder (requires intent) but not manslaughter (doesn't require intent) and the jury wasn't convinced there was intent then according to the law he should have been acquitted and the deadly force law wouldn't come in to play at all. I'm just guessing but I think it is easily possible with as little as reporters today know about anything.
|