Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 53

Thread: Jury acquits escort shooter

  1. #21
    Sage
    Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:39 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,170

    Re: Jury acquits escort shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by iacardsfan View Post
    I saw this in another thread about this topic and thought I would toss it out there. It is illegal to buy sex in the state of Texas, therefore wouldn't that mean the woman wasn't the man's "property" in the first place. Essentially make his defense invalid. Of course i'm just playing off another poster so feel free to correct me if I'm not interpreting the law correctly
    I don't think he was claiming the woman as his property - just the $150 she stole.

  2. #22
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 03:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Jury acquits escort shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Verax View Post
    Irregardless of the law being applied "improperly", I think its still a bad law. It basically says property is more important than life. Similar to the stand your ground law, it is far too disproportionate. Murder as retaliation for theft, murder as retaliation for assault.
    I tend to disagree.

    Given a conflict between a criminal who is willfully attempting to violate another person's rights, to deprive someone of his rightful property or to unjustly cause harm to another; I think the balance should be strongly in the victim's favor with regard to how much force the victim is allowed to use to defend himself and his property. It's not to much that property is more valuable than anyone's life, as it is that the right of an intended victim not to have his property stolen or his person harmed is greater than the criminal's right to steal that property or harm that person, to a sufficient degree as to justify what would otherwise be a disproportionate use of force to prevent the crime.

    It is the criminal who chose to create the situation where this conflict occurs, and I see no reason why the intended victim should be compelled to bear any adverse consequences in order to protect the criminal from bearing greater adverse consequences.

    If you don't want to be shot, then it's best not to commit a crime that would give anyone a good reason to shoot you. This choice is on the criminal, not on the intended victim.
    Last edited by Bob Blaylock; 06-07-13 at 07:36 PM. Reason: A man without a forklift is nothing. May the Forks be with you.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  3. #23
    Educator
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Seen
    09-08-16 @ 05:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    916

    Re: Jury acquits escort shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    Sounds to me like a law that was put into place for a legitimate purpose, but which is here being applied in a manner that is technically-correct, but likely not in keeping with the original intent behind it.

    Texas Penal Code - Section 9.42. Deadly Force To Protect Property

    § 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:

    (1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41;

    and (2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

    (A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime;

    or (B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property;

    and (3) he reasonably believes that:

    (A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means;

    or (B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

    I doubt that the authors of this law were thinking of a would-be prostitute trying to cheat a customer when they wrote “theft during the nighttime”, but the way the law was written, I can see how it might end up being applied here, exactly as it was.

    But I am left wondering one thing. There is a difference between an “escort” and a prostitute, though “escort” is often used as a euphemism for prostitute. A legitimate escort will go on a “date” with a client, often in contexts where a client doesn't have a real date, and it would be socially-awkward to appear without a date. The services of a legitimate escort don't include any expectation of sex or a genuine relationship. But I think it is generally understood and expected that most “escort services” are really fronts for prostitution.

    It may be that there was a genuine misunderstanding that led to this conflict. Ms. Frago possibly intended to offer her services as a legitimate social escort, and not as a prostitute, while Mr. Gilbert possibly thought he was buying the services of a prostitute. Perhaps Ms. Frago believed that she had genuinely provided the service she was being paid to provide, and therefore thought she was entitled to keep the money she had been paid for that service; while Mr. Gilbert thought he was buying sex, and felt he had been cheated because he did not get it.
    You should have quit while you were ahead and stopped at...I doubt the authors of this law were thinking...period...end of statement...no qualifications.

  4. #24
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Texas, Vegas, Colombia
    Last Seen
    11-28-16 @ 06:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,295

    Re: Jury acquits escort shooter

    it' a good law.... it wasn't applied very well in this particular case though.

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    02-18-14 @ 08:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,660

    Re: Jury acquits escort shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    This is why I would not live in Texas. They have legalized murder.
    So does California, ask Robert Blake or OJ Simpson

  6. #26
    Educator
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Seen
    09-08-16 @ 05:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    916

    Re: Jury acquits escort shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Thrilla View Post
    it' a good law.... it wasn't applied very well in this particular case though.
    If can be so agreigiously misapplied like this then it is not a good law.

  7. #27
    Educator
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Seen
    09-08-16 @ 05:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    916

    Re: Jury acquits escort shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocketman View Post
    So does California, ask Robert Blake or OJ Simpson
    prosecutorial incompetance does not compete with legislative incompetance.

  8. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    02-18-14 @ 08:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,660

    Re: Jury acquits escort shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by smb View Post
    prosecutorial incompetance does not compete with legislative incompetance.
    Of course it does, in fact it is worse. And Texas was interpretational not legislative

  9. #29
    Educator
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Last Seen
    09-08-16 @ 05:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    916

    Re: Jury acquits escort shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocketman View Post
    Of course it does, in fact it is worse. And Texas was interpretational not legislative
    Again as stated above...a law that can be so agreigiously misinterpreted IS legislative incompetance. As far as proscecutorial incompetance being worse...I would take exception to that. If a prosecutor is incompetant then it is just his/her cases that get screwed up. If the legislature is incompetent then the whole state suffers.

  10. #30
    Assassin
    Verax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    9,530

    Re: Jury acquits escort shooter

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    I tend to disagree.

    Given a conflict between a criminal who is willfully attempting to violate another person's rights, to deprive someone of his rightful property or to unjustly cause harm to another; I think the balance should be strongly in the victim's favor with regard to how much force the victim is allowed to use to defend himself and his property. It's not to much that property is more valuable than anyone's life, as it is that the right of an intended victim not to have his property stolen or his person harmed is greater than the criminal's right to steal that property or harm that person, to a sufficient degree as to justify what would otherwise be a disproportionate use of force to prevent the crime.

    It is the criminal who chose to create the situation where this conflict occurs, and I see no reason why the intended victim should be compelled to bear any adverse consequences in order to protect the criminal from bearing greater adverse consequences.

    If you don't want to be shot, then it's best not to commit a crime that would give anyone a good reason to shoot you. This choice is on the criminal, not on the intended victim.
    I'm generally talking about defending property and defending your life as two separate instances. If somebody is threatening your safety while stealing from you that has quite different implications.

    If you are stolen from, killing them as a way to stop the theft and for no other reason is too far.

    If you pick a fight and get your ass kicked (Zimmerman), killing them is too far.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •