First we have the Aboriginal community, firm in the belief that had it been an Indigenous person shooting a white man, the decision would have been different.
We have Aboriginal politicians wanting to change the make-up of juries.
We have the prime minister saying we can do better – what does that even mean – is he dissing the jury?
We had 12 jurors who heard the testimony, and then deliberated for hours before acquitting Stanley.
As a caller, with a Metis wife and first nations granddaughter, points out, just one juror with any doubts could have hung this jury.
I said criticism from all sides.
There are also audience complaints about the perceived one-sided media reporting of this verdict.
Do you think there was too much said about Aboriginal anger and Trudeau talk, and not enough about what else was going on when the shooting happened?
Or, do you think no side event could justify the fatal end to this story?
If there was a trial error, that will be dealt with by higher courts.
As they tell beginning lawyers, emotion has no place in the cold courts of the law.
Let me know what you think about that.
Bob Layton is the news manager of the Corus Edmonton group of radio stations and a commentator for Global News.