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 (6/8/2013 12:56:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl The precedent this is establishing is staggering. yeh law has been dragged too far into bullshit land. Thats what happens when you have a bunch of loons who get legislatures to pass "gotta run away" laws. Sooner of later that pendulum will swing back to reality.

Real0ne -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 12:59:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama quote: I'm not from usa so I have a question: prostitution is illegal in texas, for what I could read, so I suppose there are no standard legal contracts for "sexual services providing" and it's not an activity ruled by the law as I suppose it is commerce, so if he went to a judge in a civil court and asked his money back will he had them back? I make a different example in italy if you play poker in a private house, that's forbidden by law, you loose you have no duty to pay if you have not done yet but you can't aske the money back if you have given them before, even if the game was rigged, if someone goes in court because the money lost where more than the fine's ammount a judge would answer that he was doing something not protected by the law so he was doing it "in faith" and now the money are gone. Is there something simillar in the usa? It's the same in the USA. Illegal agreement An illegal agreement, under the common law of contract, is one that the courts will not enforce because the purpose of the agreement is to achieve an illegal end. The illegal end must result from performance of the contract itself. The classic example of such an agreement is a contract for murder. quote: Does it means if a drug trade goes wrong 'cos the buyer is not happy by quality of the drug he can legitimate kill the seller that doesn't have a satisfied or refund policy? I've been wondering this exact same thing - hopefully someone will look up Texas cases and see what happens to people who murdered someone who ripped him off in a drug deal. th ewoman had the opportunity to give him the money back. it is not about enforcing an illegal agreement. It is about her taking money that did not belong to her and no agreement existed. Either way you lose on this one.

JeffBC -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 12:59:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren No, it isn't, but what the defenders of the Texas law are missing is that it was an illicit transation, which inviolates the argument it was about protecting property. People have used the same example I did, if I gave you money for drugs, you gave me nothing for it, I don't have the right to shoot you for stealing my money, and even in texas they put people on trial for murder for doing just that, so how is this different? I wondered about that myself. My own end conclusion was that the law itself was fucked but there's that part also. My best guess is that it's different because she's a prostitute and nobody really cares if we shoot prostitutes. One wonders if there was a dispute between this same guy and.... say... Michelle Obama over $150 bucks and he shot her would the jury have been so sanguine. Oh wait... this is texas we're talking about. They'd have been throwing parties.

angelikaJ -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 1:01:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama The precedent this case sets is dangerous. A woman is NEVER required to have sex with a man if she doesn't want to. Ever. I disagree. Sure, she's not required to have sex but then she IS required to return the money. If she does not it is, in fact, theft. And it is hardly a surprise that deadly force is authorized in Texas for a theft situation. I'm not going to make this one about feminism and reproductive rights. She's a crook. You are making a strange assumption: It is not illegal to be an escort. She was an escort. It is illegal to exchange money for sex; that is prostitution. He may have expected sex, she was not required to give that, and she did not have to return the money, if she was merely his escort.

Real0ne -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 1:04:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: angelikaJ quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama The precedent this case sets is dangerous. A woman is NEVER required to have sex with a man if she doesn't want to. Ever. I disagree. Sure, she's not required to have sex but then she IS required to return the money. If she does not it is, in fact, theft. And it is hardly a surprise that deadly force is authorized in Texas for a theft situation. I'm not going to make this one about feminism and reproductive rights. She's a crook. You are making a strange assumption: It is not illegal to be an escort. She was an escort. It is illegal to exchange money for sex; that is prostitution. He may have expected sex, she was not required to give that, and she did not have to return the money, if she was merely his escort. if you are able to name the elements of a contract then you know that no contract was made regardless of either of their expectations. That said the facts are that the woman took money that did not belong to her and had no contract to do so. seems you all have a bit of a problem now.

VideoAdminRho -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 1:06:37 PM)
This thread is locked for review.

VideoAdminRho -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 1:37:29 PM)
Unlocked. I have removed a large number of posts for making the poster the subject, personal attacks, quoting or replying to a pulled post and being off topic. There are so many that rather sending emails, consider this your warning for the moment. Please remember, you can attack the post, but not the poster.

tazzygirl -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 1:58:32 PM)
Is this working now? For fuck sake BALTIMORE (AP) — A man who killed another man when a drug transaction went bad has been sentenced to 50 years in prison. Jason K. Hamel, 33, was sentenced Tuesday. He had been convicted of second-degree murder and the shooting death of Keyva Bluitt. According to evidence presented at trial, Hamel met three men in Federal Hill on June 20, 2008 to buy $5,000 worth of cocaine. Prosecutors say Hamel paid for and got a package, but found it contained only a T-shirt. Officials say Hamel pulled out a handgun and fired a single shot into the sellers’ car, striking Bluitt. http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2013/03/19/man-sentenced-for-killing-when-drug-deal-goes-bad/ Im still working on the other. Someone had asked about this scenario.

tazzygirl -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 2:04:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml This is really boring. If you had bothered to read my posts my consistently held position would be very clear to you. I'm on my phone so can't summon up the energy to explain in detail but if you read my posts and are still confused by my position, all the explanation in the world ain't gonna help you. Since the admins are selectively removing posts... allow me to repeat what I said in a more.... kinder.. friendlier manner... giving you far more than you gave me. quote: I cannot imagine that you really believe that the escort in this case wasn't fully aware that the guy was paying her for sex Calling my intelligence into question. quote: I also think you're being deliberately disingenuous when you say the above - No doubt, it would be possible to find an escort service that does not include sex in its services, and possible (though for fuck's sake, much much less so) that the same might be true of craigslist escorts, but I know very well that you are neither stupid or naive enough to imagine that a guy hiring a craigslist escort isn't expecting sex. Accusing me of being less than honest.

igor2003 -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 2:09:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: angelikaJ quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama The precedent this case sets is dangerous. A woman is NEVER required to have sex with a man if she doesn't want to. Ever. I disagree. Sure, she's not required to have sex but then she IS required to return the money. If she does not it is, in fact, theft. And it is hardly a surprise that deadly force is authorized in Texas for a theft situation. I'm not going to make this one about feminism and reproductive rights. She's a crook. You are making a strange assumption: It is not illegal to be an escort. She was an escort. It is illegal to exchange money for sex; that is prostitution. He may have expected sex, she was not required to give that, and she did not have to return the money, if she was merely his escort. When a person hires a legitimate escort it is almost always because they have an event to go to, and they do not want to go alone. I sincerely doubt that this gentleman hired this woman to come to his home to sit and chat about the weather for 20-30 minutes. If she accepted his offer of $150 for a half hour of her time, that was definitely NOT enough time to go to any event. There is little doubt in my mind that she was there as a prostitute. The money she accepted was for sex. She took the money. She did not comply with her end of the bargain, whether the bargain was stated or implied. Therefore she was a thief. Apparently, according to Texas law he was within the law to act as he did. For the record, I don’t agree with the law, nor with what he did, but due to the law as it stands it seems to me to have been the right verdict.

tazzygirl -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 2:24:36 PM)
http://www.kens5.com/news/Defense-argues-protection-of-property-in-Lenora-Frago-murder-trial-207937521.html Posted on May 17, 2013 at 6:40 PM SAN ANTONIO -- Wiping away tears, an emotional Christopher Perkins took the stand today as the first witness in the murder trial of Ezekiel "Zeke" Gilbert. "For $150, Mr. Zeke opened fire on my car and shot my friend. He took a mother from her daughter," Perkins said. The defense claimed Perkins wasn't just Lenora Frago's friend, but also her pimp on the night she was allegedly gunned down by Gilbert at the Camino Real Apartments on Christmas Eve 2009. "The holes in my car and the blood in her neck were evidence of a gun," Perkins said. The prosecution argued Gilbert became enraged and shot the escort after she and Perkins attempted to leave with the $150 he paid them without ever getting sex. That's sex Perkins said Gilbert was never going to get. "If I found out you were having sex, you were fired. Period. End of discussion," Perkins said. The defense doesn't deny Gilbert shot and killed Frago. It argued instead that the shooting was justified because Frago and Perkins were attempting to take his $150. Therefore, he was just trying to defend his property. "The responsibility lies with him," Perkins said. "He was the one holding the gun."

Edwynn -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 2:45:54 PM)
quote: http://www.kens5.com/news/Defense-argues-protection-of-property-in-Lenora-Frago-murder-trial-207937521.html Posted on May 17, 2013 at 6:40 PM SAN ANTONIO -- Wiping away tears, an emotional Christopher Perkins took the stand today as the first witness in the murder trial of Ezekiel "Zeke" Gilbert. The defense claimed Perkins wasn't just Lenora Frago's friend, but also her pimp on the night she was allegedly gunned down by Gilbert at the Camino Real Apartments on Christmas Eve 2009. "The holes in my car and the blood in her neck were evidence of a gun," Perkins said. The prosecution argued Gilbert became enraged and shot the escort after she and Perkins attempted to leave with the $150 he paid them without ever getting sex. That's sex Perkins said Gilbert was never going to get. "If I found out you were having sex, you were fired. Period. End of discussion," Perkins said. The defense doesn't deny Gilbert shot and killed Frago. It argued instead that the shooting was justified because Frago and Perkins were attempting to take his $150. Therefore, he was just trying to defend his property. "The responsibility lies with him," Perkins said. "He was the one holding the gun." All that the above tells us is that this a completely screwed-up world, especially on these shores, and nobody knows what they are doing anymore. But at least we have Perkins, the guy with greatest financial interest in the affair, telling us what a resolute and upstanding citizen he is, and that all his money was made from 'escorts,' not 'hookers.' God bless America, for patriots such as these. (Pardon me, I think I have to get out my "Batista hankie," here, the tears are swelling ... )

Hillwilliam -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 3:27:31 PM)
Looks like someone whined to get my posts disagreeing with them removed.[8\|]

njlauren -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 3:37:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl And you assume the guy is telling the truth... even though you admit his lawyers lie. Do you have any good evidence to the contrary. I'll ask again. If the genders of the shooter and thief were reversed, would you give a shit about the dead person or would you be saying "Good Riddance to a thief"? it's a simple question. Answer it. What anyone would say is meaningless, we are talking the law here...and the real point is, that this asshole was let out of jail because the court decided that an illegal transaction was a legal one, and therefore, he had the right to kill her to get his money back. If that is the case, then lawyers in drug cases where a client kills the dealer for not delivering the drugs paid for, or whatever, should be let off on the same defense, want to bet it doesn't happen? The real problem with this is he was let off because he killed someone for not delivering sex in an illegal transaction, a criminal offense, and I would be willing to bet pretty good money that in drug cases, where a buyer kills the dealer for non deliverance, they won't let the killer off, anyone wanna take that bet? It is also interesting, not only did he get off on the murder charge, they also didn't charge him with soliciting a prostitute, either...talk about double standard. There is another point here, and it is significant, it is what phillip Howard talked about in "The Death of Common Sense", where we read the law for the words instead of the intent. Laws about protecting property were designed around situations like burglary, person breaking into your business or home to steal what is yours, there intent was not to give the right to use deadly force any time you felt ripped off, which is what happened here. Even forgetting that this was illegal, suppose the douchebag who did this decided that the gas station he got his car serviced at didn't do a good job, and refuses to give him his money back, should he be able to go there with a gun and force him to pay? No, we would require he goes to small claims court. If someone sells you something on ebay and doesn't send it to you, you don't have the right to go and find the person and threaten them with a gun, you are supposed to go through legal channels. This is a financial transaction, and the law clearly says these are different, they are not property theft...and if this kind of thing becomes the norm, the morgues better start preparing, because this could apply to a lot of things, and it won't be pretty. HUH????? Now my understanding is that he was on trial for the shooting death of someone who stole money. I dont recall it being for someone who would not have sex, or someone who was trying to engage in an illegal act. Seems to me that would be triable as a completely separate matter. He was on trial because he gave the woman 150 bucks and she wouldn't put out for sex, which is not theft of property. If she attempted to pick his pocket, it would be theft of property, not coming through with an agreed upon transaction is fraud, it is a very different type of crime. Not to mention, of course, that what he was doing was illegal, which means he has no right to claim his property was stolen, given that the transaction he was doing was illegal.

njlauren -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 3:41:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama quote: I'm not from usa so I have a question: prostitution is illegal in texas, for what I could read, so I suppose there are no standard legal contracts for "sexual services providing" and it's not an activity ruled by the law as I suppose it is commerce, so if he went to a judge in a civil court and asked his money back will he had them back? I make a different example in italy if you play poker in a private house, that's forbidden by law, you loose you have no duty to pay if you have not done yet but you can't aske the money back if you have given them before, even if the game was rigged, if someone goes in court because the money lost where more than the fine's ammount a judge would answer that he was doing something not protected by the law so he was doing it "in faith" and now the money are gone. Is there something simillar in the usa? It's the same in the USA. Illegal agreement An illegal agreement, under the common law of contract, is one that the courts will not enforce because the purpose of the agreement is to achieve an illegal end. The illegal end must result from performance of the contract itself. The classic example of such an agreement is a contract for murder. quote: Does it means if a drug trade goes wrong 'cos the buyer is not happy by quality of the drug he can legitimate kill the seller that doesn't have a satisfied or refund policy? I've been wondering this exact same thing - hopefully someone will look up Texas cases and see what happens to people who murdered someone who ripped him off in a drug deal. th ewoman had the opportunity to give him the money back. it is not about enforcing an illegal agreement. It is about her taking money that did not belong to her and no agreement existed. Either way you lose on this one. Taking money that didn't belong to her? So she reached in, picked his pocket and took the money? He gave her the money in a quid pro quo for her being there, presumably to have sex. Like I said, then using the same logic, I could kill the mechanic who didn't repair my car correctly, the guy who sold me a car as new that had been damaged and so forth. The defense lawyer said that, he said that the guy gave her money with the idea of having sex, and she took the money and refused to give him what was agreed upon, which is a transaction, not theft, because he gave her the money with the idea she would perform a service...which is not theft, it is fraud, it is a broken contract, but it is not considered theft, it is dealt with in a different area of law.

Real0ne -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 3:43:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren He was on trial because he gave the woman 150 bucks and she wouldn't put out for sex, which is not theft of property. If she attempted to pick his pocket, it would be theft of property, not coming through with an agreed upon transaction is fraud, it is a very different type of crime. Not to mention, of course, that what he was doing was illegal, which means he has no right to claim his property was stolen, given that the transaction he was doing was illegal. The defense doesn't deny Gilbert shot and killed Frago. It argued instead that the shooting was justified because Frago and Perkins were attempting to take his $150. Therefore, he was just trying to defend his property. if I hand you 150 for a dvd player and you leave with both against my protests that is theft in this country. so you are saying that the defense was pure bullshit and she gave him the 150 dollars back?

Edwynn -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 3:50:47 PM)
You mean she didn't have a "money back guarantee"? Oh, what is the world coming to? No wonder US exports are on the decline.

tazzygirl -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 3:53:52 PM)
~FR I really think we have the biggest dispute over expectations. Does it matter what he "expected"? Unless itw as a written or verbal contract, his expectations mean squat. I can have every expectation of winning the lottery. But if my numbers dont come up, then my expectations mean squat. I can meet someone for coffee, they can have every expectation under the sun to go from there to a hotal to have sex... I dont even have to agree to that for some to have that expectation. This is what started the date rape laws.... the expectation that men will get something simply because they are in a relationship, or took a woman out on a date... Its also what got rid of the marital rape laws... the expectation men have that once they marry a woman, sex is always expected. What would do this country a world of good, on many levels, is legalizing prostitution and getting rid of all these "BS" expectations.

njlauren -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 3:56:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: angelikaJ quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama The precedent this case sets is dangerous. A woman is NEVER required to have sex with a man if she doesn't want to. Ever. I disagree. Sure, she's not required to have sex but then she IS required to return the money. If she does not it is, in fact, theft. And it is hardly a surprise that deadly force is authorized in Texas for a theft situation. I'm not going to make this one about feminism and reproductive rights. She's a crook. You are making a strange assumption: It is not illegal to be an escort. She was an escort. It is illegal to exchange money for sex; that is prostitution. He may have expected sex, she was not required to give that, and she did not have to return the money, if she was merely his escort. if you are able to name the elements of a contract then you know that no contract was made regardless of either of their expectations. That said the facts are that the woman took money that did not belong to her and had no contract to do so. seems you all have a bit of a problem now. It has the elements of a contract, an oral one, but nonetheless a contract. In a contract, one party agrees to provide something, a good or service, for a particular price or in kind reimbursement, and the other party agrees to the terms. As long as both parties have equal standing, are able to consent to the deal, and one party doesn't have full freedom to accept or deny the contract, it is one. If the guy took out a gun, and put it to her head, and told her you'll accept 40 bucks for me to screw you, it would not be a valid contract. An oral contract has much, much less value under the law, but it can be held to be one under the right circumstances, for example, if both parties agree that said oral contract happened. This is not a contract for the same reason it isn't theft, it happened with something illegal, and contracts are automatically null and void if they involve illegal activity.

crazyml -> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him (6/8/2013 3:56:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: crazyml This is really boring. If you had bothered to read my posts my consistently held position would be very clear to you. I'm on my phone so can't summon up the energy to explain in detail but if you read my posts and are still confused by my position, all the explanation in the world ain't gonna help you. Since the admins are selectively removing posts... allow me to repeat what I said in a more.... kinder.. friendlier manner... giving you far more than you gave me. quote: I cannot imagine that you really believe that the escort in this case wasn't fully aware that the guy was paying her for sex Calling my intelligence into question. No it isn't. Please read the sentence again. quote: quote: I also think you're being deliberately disingenuous when you say the above - No doubt, it would be possible to find an escort service that does not include sex in its services, and possible (though for fuck's sake, much much less so) that the same might be true of craigslist escorts, but I know very well that you are neither stupid or naive enough to imagine that a guy hiring a craigslist escort isn't expecting sex. Accusing me of being less than honest. I can only apologise for this, I really do believe that you don't think you're being disingenuous. Let me have another go at my closing... I am really content to let others read my posts, and yours, and come to their own conclusions. It doesn't matter to me whether you think I'm a woman hating jackass. Just as I am sure that it wouldn't matter to you in the least in entirely hypothetical and unlikely situation that I thought you were a hysterical, swivel-eyed madwag who was too hysterical and touchy to conduct any kind of rational argument with. Obviously I don't think that, and even if I did, would never dream in a million years of saying it, as that would be a breach of TOS!

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.859375E-02