You believe that his ex just shot him in cold blood, or could it be that it had something to do with his anger that the court required him to manage?

Would the judge really have any reason to bring up his flawed belief that woman can't be abusers if it was framed as being in self defense? It sounds like there's a history of the wife instigating violence, with the wording.

With the wording? You’re seriously reading way too far into things. The wording doesn’t suggest that at all.

I would say that self-defense is the claim being made by her. Women can abuse... I wish more people in high places would realize that.

They can be abusers, doesn't mean that ALL wives are abusers. Just like men can be playing the victim card when they're in the wrong themselves. There isn't the full story. It does sound like self-defense no matter how you bend it. Obviously the OP will think he didn't do anything wrong if he has anger issues and is an abuser himself. Who admits to that?

Prenup probably would not do anything, if a judge decided that he needs anger management for getting shot.

I agree that it seems unlikely that the judge would do that based on this, and that a lot is being left out (presumably in part because of the word limit), but assuming that OP MUST be a wife beater and drunk is a bit much. We don't know.