Ads by Yahoo!

" Because I am a former resident of Hallsville, my young daughter knew the victims in this case. She and her friend often babysat for Kendall and his siblings. I find it very sad that the judicial system seems to take so lightly the unavoidable death of children. Our lawmakers, in all their infinite wisdom, slaps perps on the wrists for their roles in the deaths of children. But catch someone with cocaine, and off they go for a 30-year stint in the big house. We can't blame judges or lawyers; lawyers are simply paid mouthpieces and judges simply see to it that the laws passed by our government are upheld. Blame the source...those who pass/do not pass bills. Pause for a moment here and look at your beautiful child/grandchild...imagine someone plunging a knife into their little, helpless bodies. Imagine them drowning while others stand by and watch... Now put pen and hand and write to your representatives, telling them how you'd feel if someone did that to your little one. "

" To News Now: In response to your comment, just because a person is convicted on a lesser included charge or is acquitted on all charges, does not necessarily mean that the prosecution had a weak case. However, I will add that it depends on the case. On one hand, in many people's eyes, the prosecution had a strong case against OJ Simpson, yet he was acquitted on double murder charges. On the other hand, you have the DA in the Duke Lacross case, drop rape charges against the three players who have been accused. In that case, you would have to question the validity of the remaining charges. Getting back to the Amanda Hamm case, the jury in her case, just had a hard time believing that she could kill her three kids. In many cases, a case can be won or lost in jury selection. I do believe that if the Amanda Hamm case was tried in some other county, such as McLean instead of Macon, that she probably would have been convicted on the murder charge. "

" If the prosecution did the best it could do in the Hamm case, and the jury voted for a lesser charge, then isn't this a strong indication the prosecution had a weak case? Prosecutors went into the Hamm case claiming they would prove a conspiracy existed between Hamm and LaGrone to commit the murders, but they soon dropped the issue and presented no evidence to that end. Also, some key pieces of the prosecution's evidence was contradicted by police officers who testified when Hamm's defense attorney offered other evidence. Prosecutors may have done their best, but the jury did exactly what it was supposed to do. "

" To good: Based on your comment, I get the impression that you are in favor of the death penalty. I happen to support the death penalty too. In terms of the latter part of your comment, the jury in the Maurice LaGrone case voted not to give him the death penalty. Since the jury in the LaGrone case chose not to give him the death penalty, it would have been much harder on the prosecution's part, to be successful in getting the death penalty for Amanda Hamm. If you want to criticize somebody, criticize the jury LaGrone case for voting not to give him the death penalty. Likewise, criticize the jury in the Amanda Hamm case for voting to acquit her on 1st degree murder and instead convicting her on child endangerment. I think the prosecution did the best they could. "

" O am glad they are not rushing into this one. They probably learned their lesson on the other big trial from that town being a fiasco and those 2 getting out of the death penalty. "