: What if this "murderer", at the time he committed such deeds, had been part of a "gang" that was involved in "gang warfare" ... whereby he participated in the disrespect shown for life. Now he thinks of himself as having committed "murder" because of his participation and support for his "gang", even though it was "kill or be killed".
According to the letter the guy didn't confess to self-defense, Yadirf.
Besides, that's not the point at all, and as usual you are wont to avoid it. The society didn't make any comments about whether "kill-or-be-killed" was more mitigating than cold-blooded murder and that in a killing "kill-or-be-killed" or even a killing in self-defense justified the elders protecting him. They flat-out said to hide the truth about what he did.
Since they didn't stipulate anything about the circumstances of how the murder/killing happened one can hardly argue what you are arguing.
Forcus on the FACTS: the society said to harbor the guy and not tell anyone about what he did: the congregation, the police, ANYONE. Period.
Surely even you can see that is unconscionable.
Farkel