I wouldn't change a thing. If you and the others call this justice then so be it.<quoted text>When you're on your back on the ground, it's not a stand your ground case.
[QUOTE] Self defense law was not represented well in this case."
What would you change? It took over 200 years to (mostly, Ohio still does) get rid of the notion that a person who defends himself has to prove his innocence (in contradiction to one of the basic tenets of American jurisprudence... innocent until proven guilty) and "Stand your ground" is another step in that direction (duty to retreat requires the court to assume that the defendant both knew of an avenue of retreat and knew it was safe, and puts the burden of proof on the defendant to prove what he didn't know). So what is it that you think isn't well represented (whatever that means)?
The devil reveals his true face sooner or later.