Texas Says Its Fine To Shoot Women That Won't Have Sex With You

[Gravekeeper]

Yeah, its not really clear what was going on. Not without the original ad to go by at least. However, it could be that she felt uncomfortable / threatened being alone with him and was trying to get back to her driver.

I don't understand why there aren't other charges here though. His defense hinges on fully admitting he committing another crime: Solicitation. While the driver was not charged with being a pimp or anything of that nature. Likewise as noted the police did not classify this as a theft ( Technically it would be a breach of contract sort of situation ).

So why is it he gets away with solicitation and with murder despite the police not saying this was a theft? Which is required for the law in question to be valid. Though as the prosecution pointed out the law is intended for law abiding citizens to begin with. The law doesn't excuse you for shooting your drug dealer for cheating you for example.

Its just a complete judicial failure all around.

[Andara Bledin]

Regarding other charges: It's possible that other charges were brought and dealt with outside of the murder/manslaughter charge.

Then again, considering that they failed to get a conviction on the killing itself, it's possible that they didn't even slap those on in the first place, too worked up over getting him for murder.

[Seifer]

Regarding other charges: It's possible that other charges were brought and dealt with outside of the murder/manslaughter charge.

Then again, considering that they failed to get a conviction on the killing itself, it's possible that they didn't even slap those on in the first place, too worked up over getting him for murder.

Considering how this jury reconfigured the law in their own minds, I doubt the prosecution could have even gotten him on charges of throwing a deadly missile into an occupied car (I.E. Shooting into an occupied car). In my state that's considered a felony charge. However, since the jury figured the murder itself was justified, they probably wouldn't have seen an issue with him shooting up the car, either.

[static]

1234567890

[draco664]

However, since the jury figured the murder itself was justified, they probably wouldn't have seen an issue with him shooting up the car, either.

I'm not sure you can make that point. I've seen many jurors interviewed after murder cases where they voted to acquit, but only because they were not permitted to vote guilty on a lesser charge.

Sort of like, yes, you killed her, yes you meant it, but the prosecution didn't prove you planned it out in advance, so we have to find you not guilty of murder 1, but if the charge was murder 2, we'd convict.

[Seifer]

I'm not sure you can make that point. I've seen many jurors interviewed after murder cases where they voted to acquit, but only because they were not permitted to vote guilty on a lesser charge.

Sort of like, yes, you killed her, yes you meant it, but the prosecution didn't prove you planned it out in advance, so we have to find you not guilty of murder 1, but if the charge was murder 2, we'd convict.

He wasn't found Not Guilty because of reasonable doubt - he was found Not Guilty because the jury felt that he murdered a thief and thus hadn't broken the law. My point was if the jury felt that he had acted under the letter of the law, why would shooting into the car be an issue? It was shooting blindly into the car that caused the murder in the first place.

[HYHYBT]

Likewise as noted the police did not classify this as a theft ( Technically it would be a breach of contract sort of situation ).

Except, of course, that it can't be a breach of contract without a valid contract to begin with, and you cannot create a valid contract to exchange sex for money in Texas.

[Gravekeeper]

Except, of course, that it can't be a breach of contract without a valid contract to begin with, and you cannot create a valid contract to exchange sex for money in Texas.

Tell that to the jury >.>

[Andara Bledin]

Tell that to the jury >.>

Thus my contention that this is a failure of the prosecution to actually convey to the jury why they should find him guilty, and why he wasn't just trying to recover stolen money.