Daniel Perry shot and killed Garrett Foster at a protest/riot last year. What is not disputed is that Foster approached the window of Perry's car with a rifle, when Perry shot him. Could Perry's defense point out that other incidents at similar protests ended with the person in the vehicle being dragged from the car and beaten, shot, or killed? These other incidents did not involve Perry or Foster, but both could have heard about them on the news.
How much context are you allowed to give a jury? I know that the standard for self-defense is "Would a reasonable person fear for their life?" but the situations in which a reasonable person would be afraid change with what they know about similar situations.