Your staff at The Advocate should be admonished for its slanted coverage of the Merritt Landry incident. The paper of Dec.15 claims: “Some held rallies in support of Landry, and by extension in support of all people tired of crime in the city who take the law into their own hands.”
First, I helped organize those rallies and I can tell you they did not advocate that law-abiding citizens should “take the law into their own hands,” nor do I believe that was Mr. Landry’s goal when Marshall Coulter climbed over his fence at two o’clock in the morning.
Rather, I believe Mr. Landry’s goal was to protect his pregnant wife and child from a criminal who invaded their private space and was a few feet from their back door.
Second, it is unfair, shallow and immature to judge Mr. Landry’s actions with 20/20 hindsight. How could Mr. Landry have known the invader was unarmed, or not high on drugs or alcohol, or was a teenager? And by the way, teenagers murder too.
And third, I note that while the article quoted a member of a group called “Justice for Marshall Coulter” it did not balance that with a quote from a homeowner-oriented group.
These three facts indicate The Advocate’s coverage is slanted and prejudiced. I protest this and request a more balanced approach in the future.
founder, Home Defense Foundation of New Orleans