Texas Says It's OK to Shoot an Escort If She Won't Have Sex With You

Look this bitch had four options:

1. not be a whore
2. give the dude some sort of sexual release after teh exchange of money
3. give the dude his money back because she decided she didn't want to fuck him
4. take the dude's money, tell him to fuck off, and run away.

The whore chose door #4. She knew the risk, made a bad decision, and paid for it with her life. Good. At least now she won't be breeding. I don't give a fuck about the legality of it, she got what she deserved. Don't be a whore and these things won't happen.

Trollface_sl said:

Then the money was never hers since such product or obligation does not exist.

Click to expand...

Except it changed hands and became hers when he paid for her time. Learn to read.

It doesn't sound like he even got her 'time'. I really doubt they sat around having a nice conversation for an hour before she decided to split, so if he was only paying her for her 'time' he didn't even get that.

Gavinrad_sl said:

Except it changed hands and became hers when he paid for her time. Learn to read.

Click to expand...

The difference between murder and manslaughter in Texas (and everywhere else in the US) is in the killer's mental state. The defense didn't have to prove he was fucking innocent. The defense had to present it was reasonable he BELIEVED he was trying to stop a thief from running off with his money and not just killing for the sake of killing, they had to proveit was a fucking reasonable possibility, not prove it was correct for him to do so. If the prosecution had gone for a manslaughter charge they would have won.

Gavinrad_sl said:

Ok, so you're admitting he murdered her? Because she can't be legally obligated to provide sex, which means his 150 dollars wasn't stolen, which means he wasn't trying to retrieve stolen property, in which case he's just a garden variety murderer who got away because the laws in Texas are written by violent retards and the juries in Texas are populated with with violent retards.

Click to expand...

To respond to you and VM at the same time, let me quote myself from a few pages ago:

OneofOne_sl said:

The problem is, from my understanding, was they were stealing from people, but not actually breaking any law by doing so. So if they were committing "crimes" without breaking the law, I have zero issue with someone doling out "justice" that would otherwise break the law. Balances out in my book /shrug

Click to expand...

I have zero doubt in my mind that she and her pimp 100% knew sex was an expectation from the men they took money from. I mean, you'd have to be, well, YOU, to think otherwise. When you decide to run around and steal money from people, and then essentially go "haha you can't do anything about it", I really give zero fucks about what happens to you.

OneofOne_sl said:

To respond to you and VM at the same time, let me quote myself from a few pages ago:



I have zero doubt in my mind that she and her pimp 100% knew sex was an expectation from the men they took money from. I mean, you'd have to be, well, YOU, to think otherwise. When you decide to run around and steal money from people, and then essentially go "haha you can't do anything about it", I really give zero fucks about what happens to you.

Click to expand...

So all I have to do is prove that I had an expectation for it to become legally binding? Where is the proof that they led them to believe it was time to be spent in a sexual nature? Show me the craigslist ad in question that makes it so apparent they were selling sex.

Vatoreus Malfost_sl said:

So all I have to do is prove that I had an expectation for it to become legally binding? Where is the proof that they led them to believe it was time to be spent in a sexual nature? Show me the craigslist ad in question that makes it so apparent they were selling sex.

Click to expand...

Innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt, the defense doesn't have to prove shit.

Laedrun_sl said:

The difference between murder and manslaughter in Texas (and everywhere else in the US) is in the killer's mental state. The defense didn't have to prove he was fucking innocent. The defense had to present it was reasonable he BELIEVED he was trying to stop a thief from running off with his money and not just killing for the sake of killing, they had to proveit was a fucking reasonable possibility, not prove it was correct for him to do so. If the prosecution had gone for a manslaughter charge they would have won.

Click to expand...

Why would a manslaughter charge stick any better than a murder charge if it was legally justified for him to use lethal force? Your argument makes no sense.

Vatoreus Malfost_sl said:

So all I have to do is prove that I had an expectation for it to become legally binding? Where is the proof that they led them to believe it was time to be spent in a sexual nature? Show me the craigslist ad in question that makes it so apparent they were selling sex.

Click to expand...

Craigslist no longer has an adult section, but if you are posting an ad anywhere on the 'female escorts' section of backpage (the new replacement for craiglist), it's understood that you are offering services of a sexual nature, although legally you are just selling your time, which is why they are allowed to post the ads. So while she could not be legally obligated to provide sex, there is absolutely no doubt that the dude was expecting sex and she went there knowing that he was expecting sex.

Vatoreus Malfost_sl said:

So all I have to do is prove that I had an expectation for it to become legally binding?

Click to expand...

This makes no sense. Prostitution is not legal and no one dispute that...

Where is the proof that they led them to believe it was time to be spent in a sexual nature? Show me the craigslist ad in question that makes it so apparent they were selling sex.

Click to expand...

Of course, my bad. Posting an escort ad on Craigslist and charging $150 for 30 minutes - it was obvious she was just selling girl-talk time. Why would any rational being possibly think they were buying sex?

Gavinrad_sl said:

Why would a manslaughter charge stick any better than a murder charge if it was legally justified for him to use lethal force? Your argument makes no sense.

Click to expand...

It wasn't legally justified, as you pointed out, it wasn't really theft (illegal contract or whatever). The defense basically proved he was possibly guilty of manslaughter in order to prove he was not guilty of murder beyond reasonable doubt.

Laedrun_sl said:

It wasn't legally justified, as you pointed out, it wasn't really theft (illegal contract or whatever). The defense basically proved he was possibly guilty of manslaughter in order to prove he was not guilty of murder beyond reasonable doubt.

Click to expand...

Laedrun_sl said:

The difference between murder and manslaughter in Texas (and everywhere else in the US) is in the killer's mental state. The defense didn't have to prove he was fucking innocent. The defense had to present it was reasonable he BELIEVED he was trying to stop a thief from running off with his money and not just killing for the sake of killing, they had to proveit was a fucking reasonable possibility, not prove it was correct for him to do so. If the prosecution had gone for a manslaughter charge they would have won.

Click to expand...

So did he reasonably believe he was trying to stop a thief, or didn't he?

Gavinrad_sl said:

So did he reasonably believe he was trying to stop a thief, or didn't he?

Click to expand...

It's a reasonable possibility he did believe it to be the case. If they had charged him with manslaughter the question would have been "was the shooting legally justified". With a "murder" case they have to prove his motive within a stricter set of guidelines.

One thing to remember in all this: I'm assuming this was an unwitnessed act, which means the only testimony was probably that of the killer. Considering the fact the dude is trying to pay for sex and thinks a reasonable thing to do is shoot someone who doesn't put out, I'm going to guess he was full of shit and there is more to the story that will probably never be learned.

For all we know, maybe he wanted her to fuck his ass with a strap-on and verbally berate him as it happened, then when she said "this is fucking weird, I'm outta here!", he was so fearful his secret would be learned, he killed her to keep her quiet!

Laedrun_sl said:

It's a reasonable possibility he did believe it to be the case. If they had charged him with manslaughter the question would have been "was the shooting legally justified". With a "murder" case they have to prove his motive within a stricter set of guidelines.

Click to expand...

They have to prove it was an unlawful killing of a human by another human with malice aforethought(intent). Firing 4 times at someone who is not threatening you in any way and is, in fact, fleeing for their lives, is at the very leastIntent to cause grievous bodily harm short of death, if notIntent to kill.

Every element required for murder is there, except in Texas you're allowed to murder people over 150 bucks if they steal it from you at night, even if you're in the middle of committing a crime.

Cybsled_sl said:

One thing to remember in all this: I'm assuming this was an unwitnessed act, which means the only testimony was probably that of the killer. Considering the fact the dude is trying to pay for sex and thinks a reasonable thing to do is shoot someone who doesn't put out, I'm going to guess he was full of shit and there is more to the story that will probably never be learned.

For all we know, maybe he wanted her to fuck his ass with a strap-on and verbally berate him as it happened, then when she said "this is fucking weird, I'm outta here!", he was so fearful his secret would be learned, he killed her to keep her quiet!

Click to expand...

She had a driver who witnessed it, since he was being shot at too. She also didn't die until 7 months after the shooting, although none of the articles I've read said anything about how much she was able to talk during those 7 months.

Cybsled_sl said:

One thing to remember in all this: I'm assuming this was an unwitnessed act, which means the only testimony was probably that of the killer. Considering the fact the dude is trying to pay for sex and thinks a reasonable thing to do is shoot someone who doesn't put out, I'm going to guess he was full of shit and there is more to the story that will probably never be learned.

For all we know, maybe he wanted her to fuck his ass with a strap-on and verbally berate him as it happened, then when she said "this is fucking weird, I'm outta here!", he was so fearful his secret would be learned, he killed her to keep her quiet!

Click to expand...

Remember her pimp? the one that drove away with her when the guy started shooting at her, that's one witness. Oh, and then there was the girl herself who survived for 6 months and was released from the hospital into the care of her brother. She was just paralyzed not dead or in a coma, when she eventually died it was because her breathing tube got clogged up at her brother's house and she suffocated.

Moral of the story is don't scam the John.