My first reaction upon reading that Reinaldo Rivera, 38, murdered Darwin Gonzalez, 34, for hogging the very last delicious fried chicken drumstick in the pan was--of COURSE--shock and outrage at this senseless act of violence.
My second reaction though was that this was kinda legit justifiable homicide, and I'd be happy to take his case for free and mount the "Colonel Sanders" defense. This is similar to the defense successfully deployed in that Nutella waffle Costco brawl, and it basically holds that some foods (e.g. Nutella and fried chicken) are so indisputably delicious, that it's fully legit to assault or murder someone in order to get your grimy paws on the last morsel.
It's like how back in the olden days (or maybe even now? Prosecutors, help me out here) you could plea bargain a murder 1 charge down to manslaughter if you caught your wife doing reverse cowboy with the pool guy. "In flagrante delicto," I believe that's called. Same deal. Except it's "In flagrante delicioso."
This is like a super novel and HIGHLY legit new defense. Someone call Alan Dershowitz!