Mama Carol

My daughter was about an hour and a half late getting home one night from a date. Had she been another half hour, I would have called the police.

His father didn't report him as missing until the next day. He carried no identification and nobody knew who he was. He was "John Doe".

I read the full story a couple of weeks ago. Seems like the daughter was in the garage, having escaped out there with her mom. I could be wrong about that. I have slept since I read it.

Let's not forget the real stories that matter. Like North West or the royal baby.

That's why mandatory sentences are ridiculous. There should be some accounting for the particular circumstances of a situation.

Then there is my daughter who walked over a mile to the grocery store to buy only what is allowed because they have no money left after paying for utilities. Her house is barely 1300 sq ft. Clothes generally come from a thrift store for her, hubby and the girls. But she's lumped into that category of those fleecing the system, who wear designer clothes and who drive Escalades. Thank the good Lord, my daughter now has a job, though it is part-time, but it is helping make a huge difference to their family. They have no child care expenses because she and her hubby work at the same plac

Read the rest of the story. She went OUT of the house to retrieve a firearm and returned to the house to fire the shots. That leaves out SYG. She retreated but didn't stay away. Now, had she had the firearm on her and fired the shots, she likely would have been fine as that would have been self defense. One cannot claim self defense if you GO BACK to the person.

You can thank the government, their regulators and the banks for that. It's called greed.

So, are you saying that in the future jurors need to take into consideration public opinion before rendering a decision? How about race? No, let's keep trials about facts and the truth and make sure jurors make decisions based on those. I had two friends who were killed and their killers still roam the streets, too. I know a little about how you feel. Prayers and good wishes to you.

You know the answer to that. The bleeding heart liberals say you have absolutely no right, or responsibility, to defend yourself. Just let the criminals have everything. BTW, thank you for what you do for Cobb County. I no longer live there but still have ties to the area.

No reason not to. He has no conviction. Like it or not, this is how the law is supposed to work.

Maybe, just maybe, it will convince wannabe thugs, gangstas and plain criminals to think twice before they confront someone. It might be that that "someone" is armed. Nah, that would never happen because as we all know, crooks are stupid. And obviously most people feel NOBODY has the right to defend themselves. Besides, in a few months Lindsey Lohan will be arrested and sentenced to rehab again, the Kardashians will do whatever it is they do and everyone will have forgotten that they were supposed to arm themselves, shoot someone and claim self defense. That ONLY works if it is.

The law says that you are justified in using deadly force if you fear for your life. It doesn't say "if the public opinion deems your injuries sufficient for us to think you're justified you may use deadly force IF.........". You're right, the verdict was based on law and evidence, not emotion. A juror has to leave emotion at the door and made a decision based on facts presented in the case. They had a tough, tough job.

Some are not wanting justice but revenge. Revenge won't bring back Trayvon, nor will it bring closure.

Thanks but no thanks. I don't go looking for trouble, nor do I expect any. I'm glad to know I'm not the only one who saw that.

Excellent post!

Obviously women can process information and make an informed decision. They had to take their personal feelings out of it and make a decision based on facts. Harder to do than it sounds, too. I won't go back through what the jury heard and decided on.

No, he was not told to go home. He was told by the 911 operator "we don't need you to do that".

Sorry, I thought there for a minute you had posted Trayvon's rap sheet until I saw the dates.My bad.

Most people who are innocent of wrongdoing don't have a problem with questions.

Keep in mind that one can murder a child and not face capital punishment and generally not even face hard time. So, if indeed Trayvon was a "child", Zimmerman would have walked anyway. A claim of self defense and especially a prosecution that was so tenuous, there really was no other option for the jury. Manslaughter would have been a real stretch.

Just to be safe, I'm going to stay out of Atlanta forever. And think I'll be darn careful what parts of Pensacola I go to in the next couple of weeks.

Just remember that "child" may refer to age and not what a person is like. His chronological age was 17 but he was far from an innocent child. Had he truly been innocent, he would have gone on his merry way and still be walking among us.

You're 1000% correct. He has to live with that for the rest of his life.