Ok, this is what I found.
www.courttv.com then click on trials and the Vang Verdict. The danged link wouldn't work.
"The 36-year-old St. Paul man claimed he opened fire after one of the hunters fired at him first as he was walking away from the confrontation.
But, it also states: "By Vang's own admissions, no one in the group physically threatened him with violence."
"Four of the six victims were shot from behind as they fled, and Vang testified that three of them deserved to die for the "disrespect" they had shown him in hurling racial epithets at him and refusing to let him leave peacefully."
To me, that's sounds kind of contradictory. He admits no one physically threatened him, but then he says one shot at him? So, it appears there may have been some "hate" going on between both sides. That is, if you believe the defendant and not the survivors. The fact that he shot four of the six victims in the back leads me to believe there was a lot more going on in Vang's mind than someone just calling him names. And who deserves to die just because they disrespect someone? If this were true, I'd say none of us would be here.
I'm afraid I'm leaning on believing this guy took out his own hate and anger on the first "group or person" that hit him just right.