Of all the awful things that have happened to young(er) men in the place where I used to live, car accidents, suicides, and etc, perhaps the most tragic is the most recent. A kid from a neighboring town played football (consolidated sports) with my brother. I don’t really remember the guy per se because there were a lot of kids and I was a freshman when he was a senior. Not exactly on the radar so to speak, but anyway, here’s the story:
He has having issues with getting access to visit one of his kids, to the point where he was having to get a police escort part of the time to force the mom and whoever to hand the kid over, as they have shared custody, or what have you. Until last week when someone (no one knows who) apparently got sick of it and shot him, in the head. The mom, one of the grandparents, someone. To my knowledge this is the total truth, now if there were mitigating circumstances I dont know about it. He goes to pick up his kid and they don’t want to give the kid up so they kill him. Umm, extreme anyone? Seriously?
It appears from the obituary that he had 2 kids, from different moms, of course they have the same last name but they live in different towns so that’s how I surmised that. Anyway, the point is that they set up a memorial fund for college for one kid but not the other (whose family shot him)… I can’t figure out if that’s right or wrong. On one hand he would have taken care of both kids equally would he have lived, on the other, he’s dead because they couldn’t get with the courts decision and just let him have visitation. What do you think? Should there have been a fund set up for both kids no matter how bad the family was, or were they right in only asking for money for the one kid? Let me know.
I think it depends on who set up the memorial fund, really.
But what a sad story. And you know, there’s never a good time for stuff like this to happen, but during the holidays has to be the absolute worst.
Only if the shooter couldn’t dip into the fund in anyway.