Ok, let's give the judge the benefit of the doubt and say there was no bias in his answers. To say what he said would tell me he has never been in a situation where he was being threatened by more than one person. You don't have time to assess the demeanor of the other 3 to determine if they are a threat or not. When you're fighting for your life you can't take any chances.I think the judge was wrong to tell them deadly force is justified against one but not the others. They were acting as one. How is Dunn supposed to know which ones were a threat and which ones were not? Sounds like the judge wants him found guilty of something. More grounds for an appeal.
You are reading quite a bit into that. If the law says that self-defense must be applied separately to each count, isn't it the judge's responsibility to tell that to the jurors?
*I don't know what the relevant law(s) are, I'm just making the point that I don't see anything in the judge's answers to indicate any kind of bias.