I hate to say it, but this case is much more important than Kyle.

Kyle's actions in each shot he took were so obviously justified, with multiple camera angles, gun shots, threats, attacks, him trying to run away at every possible moment of escape, that if his actions were not self defense no matter what the rest of the context then there is no such thing as self defense. In other words, if he is not exonerated on self defense, then our inalienable right (can never be taken away) to defend ourselves no longer exists as far as the system is concerned.

That is why this case needs to be defended on his actions at that moment. Because it is his actions in that moment that are in question, and his actions in that moment that were immaculate. Looking elsewhere for justification diminishes those actions, and justifies other future cases against our inalienable rights when that otherwise irrelevant context does not exist.