When was Mitchell's policy legally rescinded? It was legally implemented, so I would think that more than the minister's word, that proof of status is not required, is needed to change it. Until such time, these schools are following the law and have nothing to explain.

Too many Bahamians have a warped sense of what doing the "right" thing is and so it's usually done for the wrong reasons including applause and admiration. In this case, taking in this parentless child was the so called "right" thing to do, even though there is clearly no genuine concern for her wellbeing. The fact that they allowed it to be recorded shows they wanted to humiliate her as well. I doubt they would do the same to their own child.

If this girl is as out of control as they claim, the last place she should be is with people who believe they can beat it out of her. A reality check from living in a girls' institution or the harshness of the streets, would have humbled her in no time. She would have real respect and appreciation for genuinely concerned people who try to help her in the future.

I'm not surprised that he believes integration of immigrants is the government's responsibility and makes no mention of repatriation as one of his "tentacles". If they come legally, the pathway toward integration is clear. If they continue to come illegally, they will continue to hide on the outskirts of society. The only responsibility the government has is to find and deport them, regardless of how long they evaded authorities and how many "Bahamas born" children they claim to have.

What exactly is Mitchell speaking out against? They've both used their positions to make the Bahamas an anchor baby state.

The constitution makes no guarantee of status after the window, yet they both do. If one is not born in Bahamas but comes as a young child he/she is essentially in the same position as far as ties and formative years. How can they deny status to that person based on something that is not upheld by the constitution?

I'm sure they dont. No wonder the boats and Bahamas born babies keep coming. Even the loud opposers are complicit in Haitianizing the country. What a shame.

Fred Mitchell has a valid point.

However, if they insist on holding trials for persons caught in the act, then the trial date needs to be set within hours of the plea. And Fred Smith and others can fly in on that day and defend whomever they want at their expense. Those who plead not guilty should also be fined. If they have a $3k fine or prison hanging over their heads if they return, I'm sure many won't.

Why would he propose a "solution" that rewards missing the deadline with something even better? Permanent residency implies they will retain or still have to acquire foreign passports meanwhile benefitting from Bahamas' resources in every way (except voting). What's the incentive for applying for citizenship? His brazen attempt at creating a bi-national country should be rejected.

At most they should be given temporary status and mandated to fulfill certain requirements such as having a trade or degree, no criminal record and show stability before they are allowed to apply for citizenship. And deported if not. Immigration policies should not be developed with a charitable mindset, it should benefit the country as well.

At most Haiti's revolution gave enslavers food for thought. They had no direct or significant impact on freeing Bahamian slaves. And even if they did that price has been repaid a million times over.

Bahamian voices go unheard making demands in their own country. Meanwhile, there are millions of Haitians or descent worldwide and in Haiti to lead this cause. Let's stop the mindset that they are owed to infinity and everyone else has to make "it" happen for them.

What's happening here is hypocrisy and faux outrage. People are using this as an opportunity to assert superiority. It's all bad whether it happened in your neighborhood or across the ocean. This is as silly as the obviously broke "boss" saying, "broke people go to Miami. I got to FL."

There's really just one issue, it was illegal because the turtle was protected.

We have no idea how much the animals that end up on our plates suffer beforehand and in the process. The first blow, shot or chop may not have been sufficient, as in this case. If how really matters, I think some of you need to watch how it's done at the slaughterhouses.

@ThisIsOurs There are documentaries out there that will show you the equally brutal methods the slaughterhouses employ against animals as innocent and defenseless as this turtle. Even in the US where they supposedly have higher standards. I stopped eating meat for while after watching one. And their purpose was the same as this man - food. Don't kid yourself because you didn't see it happen to your cow, that it didn't happen.

@Jetflt Take his head off? If you wish that, even in anger, for another human being, how can you be sincerely concerned about a turtle? That's sick.

These comments reek of hypocrisy.