RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him

RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Real0ne -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 10:54:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Pft... a texas jury of his peers... ahem... forgive me if I laugh, ok [;)] This is the same "god fearing country" that brings you dinosaurs 6000 years ago. but the jury is the trier of fact, hence it is now determined to be a fact that she ripped him off. sorry. I guess the moral of the story is dont rip some guy off if you agree to fuck him in texas.

tazzygirl -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:15:40 PM)
And juries have never been wrong. [;)] Gotcha.

LafayetteLady -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:17:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam If someone takes money from you and bails, SYG isn't in the picture. You're shooting a thief. As I said earlier, if a guy had said "I'll take care of your yard for $150" and showed up with the right equipment to do the job, taken the money and given it to someone and driven off, he is a thief. People are getting into a foofaraw because it was a woman who got shot and sex was involved. A thief is a thief regardless of gender or the 'work' to be done. If she didn't want to do the work, refund the money. And yes, a version of SYG is in the picture because this particular Texas law allows you to use deadly force if someone steals a dollar from you after dark. Do you honestly believe that is a reasonable response? And if you actually read my previous posts, I was pretty clear that I'm not terribly concerned over her death or that he shot her because he thought she was going to fuck him. But I don't think that means he has the right to shoot her for it.

LafayetteLady -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:21:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin Oh good grief, I was wondering when some one would bring SYG into this. I'm not comprehending how SYG has anything to do with this situation. Though we may be in agreement that he shouldn't have shot her. Go read the link again. He was acquitted because of the Texas version of SYG. It is essentially an SYG case, not a "do I have the right to shoot a hooker when she refuses sex?" case. I don't see it as SYG. I see it as "A thief got shot in the act of stealing". By someone who isn't law enforcement. His life wasn't in danger. He was pissed he didn't get laid. Would he have shot your lawn mowing scammer? Good chance. Would that still have been wrong? Yes it would. Since when does it become "Joe Average's" right to decide what punishment a criminal gets with no trial, no defense, nothing? Again, $150 or $5, he doesn't get to shoot her. Last I checked, stealing in this country doesn't carry the death penalty. Nothing you say about her being a thief changes that. I agree, she was a whore looking to scam someone. But he isn't innocent in this either. Prostitution isn't legal in Texas, so he was already a criminal as well. So would you support her shooting him if she had sex with him and he refused to pay? That is theft as well by your definition, isn't it?

LafayetteLady -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:32:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady The problem with these broad SYG laws is that YES, obviously you can use a contract dispute as a reason to kill someone. That is not MY opinion, that was obviously the jury's............ ..........The baseline is that SYG laws allow people to use deadly force for something that does NOT carry a legal sentence of death. It puts a civilian in the position of being judge and jury, determining what THEY think is an appropriate sentence and bypassing what existing law says. SYG as I understand it eliminates the requirement for a would be victim to retreat or hide, even if that option is available, should they feel their life is threatened. I can't figure out how you apply SYG to this. Ok, I said it was an SYG TYPE of law. I went on to explain that these are all laws that allow a civilian to use deadly force without deadly force being used on them. This particular law would allow you to use deadly force and shoot someone dead if they stole a dollar from you after dark. Yes, I am grouping all the "it's ok to use deadly force" when deadly force is not necessary for defense of your own life as "SYG type laws. I really can't make it any fucking clearer. But hey, half the people on this board think it is ok to shoot someone for stealing a dollar, hell for stepping on their lawn. So they will defend to the death the idea that this law is appropriate and not being intentionally misused in this case to provide the technicality to get an acquittal.

tazzygirl -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:32:13 PM)
quote: So would you support her shooting him if she had sex with him and he refused to pay? That is theft as well by your definition, isn't it? Excellent question!

LafayetteLady -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:33:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady It puts a civilian in the position of being judge and jury, determining what THEY think is an appropriate sentence and bypassing what existing law says. OMG civilians? Operating under common law? Ruining the court biz? Got newz fer ya, there are over 20% pro se cases now days and they are winning and getting into the supreme court so you better get used to it. I have news for you, in NJ, half of those 20% are successful pro se litigants because I taught them how to do it. So not only am I used to it, but I have promoted it.

LafayetteLady -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:35:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam I read both articles in the OP (basically identical) and SYG is not mentioned in either. Why are we even debating SYG. A thief is dead. SYG has nothing to do with it. The only reason anyone has sympathy for the THIEF is it is a woman in a sexually related incident. If the situation was reversed and it was a male escort shot by a woman, you ladies wouldn't give a flying fuck. I would say the same exact thing. Joe Blow doesn't get to decide what he thinks is the appropriate "justice." He hasn't had the ability to do that in this country....oh EVER.

JeffBC -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:36:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Interesting how many posters here on a website devoted to letting strangers tie you up and use whips and knives etc. on you are boasting that they think it's OK to kill someone in a situation like that as long as its for a 'good reason'... like $150 dollars. For the record, that sure as hell is not my position. I only said I didn't want to make it some feminist thing. The issue here is... yet again... a jacked up law.

tazzygirl -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:40:07 PM)
I have seen only a few trying to make this a feminist issue..and they arent women.

LafayetteLady -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:40:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MAINEiacMISTRESS quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama Jury acquits escort shooter A Bexar County jury on Wednesday acquitted Ezekiel Gilbert of murder in the death of a 23-year-old Craigslist escort. ...During closing arguments Tuesday, Gilbert's defense team conceded the shooting did occur but said the intent wasn't to kill. Gilbert's actions were justified, they argued, because he was trying to retrieve stolen property: the $150 he paid Frago. It became theft when she refused to have sex with him or give the money back, they said. Read more: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Jury-acquits-escort-shooter-4581027.php#ixzz2VYdVexCR I am curious whether HER original agreement with him was actually FOR SEX. I mean, did her Craigslist ad actually advertise sex, or was he just HOPING for sex (as all men think EVERYTHING is about sex) perhaps the deal was just for a "date companion" but not for sex...and when she refused he then SHOT her? Sounds like he was a complete ASSSSSSSHOLE...in which case she had every right to refuse to allow him to touch her...and perhaps his ASSSSHOLE behavior warranted her keeping the $150 as compensation. For all we know she may have been a finDomme and he might not have understood the whole "Tribute and Worship from a distance" thing. Who can say...we only have the word of the ASSSHOLE holding the smoking gun to go on. So basically you have described her as every bit as much of an asshole as him. Even if she was just a "date companion" (which isn't independently advertising on CL), when she found out they wouldn't have sex, give the money back and then leave. Nothing to indicate she gave the money back. Doesn't matter how much of an asshole he was, she doesn't get to keep compensation for it. That isn't how business works, which leads back to her not being simply a "date companion." So if she was an FD and the whole "worship from a distance," why the fuck did she meet him in the first place? I don't think he should walk free for shooting her, but there is no way she was some innocent victim here. Painting her as such is ludicrous.

LafayetteLady -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:46:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I answered them all. You insisted they be yes or no...lol... you can insist all you like.. it wont happen. As far as her record, of course thats admissible. The only time it wouldnt be are in cases of rape. Clearly, this was not such a case. If she had a record of stealing, its very much admissible. quote: 1. Do you honestly believe that CL 'escorts' aren't selling sex? Yes, I believe there are some who do not, just as there are some escort services who do not. quote: 2. Do you think this was the first person that she and her accomplice had ripped off? proof otherwise. No proof, no rip off. Onus is on you. No, her previous record would not be part of the case. If it were possible the defense would have attempted to use it. Some 20 year old isn't running her own legitimate escort service. Just not happening. Any more than the duck lipped girls are legitimate FDs.

JeffBC -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:47:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I have seen only a few trying to make this a feminist issue..and they arent women. I dunno, Kali seems pretty strong on it. I'm not quite sure where you stand. In my mind this is not about her refusal to have sex. The only question is whether or not we think shooting someone dead for $150 is a "good" outcome.

LafayetteLady -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:48:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave I simply do not believe in killing for money. Beating the money out of her, another story Now that, I could get behind as well.

tazzygirl -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:49:21 PM)
Naaa.. this has nothing to do with sex for me. I would feel the same had their sexes been reversed.. had a woman killed someone over 150 dollars because they didnt complete a service for her... whatever. I simply do not agree that 150 is worth someone's life when your own is not in danger.

LafayetteLady -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:49:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: So would you support her shooting him if she had sex with him and he refused to pay? That is theft as well by your definition, isn't it? Excellent question! Then how about answering it?

tazzygirl -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:50:24 PM)
quote: No, her previous record would not be part of the case. If it were possible the defense would have attempted to use it. Some 20 year old isn't running her own legitimate escort service. Just not happening. Any more than the duck lipped girls are legitimate FDs. So if she had a record of theft and /or robberies, her record would never have come into it?

tazzygirl -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:51:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: So would you support her shooting him if she had sex with him and he refused to pay? That is theft as well by your definition, isn't it? Excellent question! Then how about answering it? First, that was not my definition. Second, no, I would not support her shooting him under those conditions.

LafayetteLady -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:52:12 PM)
The defense would have tried, the prosecution would have (rightly) objected, and the judge would have ruled in favor of the State. Much like they have ruled on the Zimmerman case. Trayvon Martin's use of marijuana and any juvenile record can not be used by the defense.

jlf1961 -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/7/2013 11:55:44 PM)
First, killing the woman was not justified in any way shape or form. Hell he wasnt justified in shooting her. At the very least he should have been convicted of second degree murder or manslaughter. Being raised in Texas, this doesnt surprise me, which is not a good thing. Now, on a related note, if this guy was such a fucking wuss that he could not take the money from her without a gun, would he have actually been able to do anything if she did agree to have sex with him? Seriously, why couldnt this male human used anything but deadly force to get his money back? But then, I dont understand going to a prostitute in the first place.

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875