Good Lord! or Holy Cow! or.........

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 3:20 pm

Jury Acquits Texas Man For Murder Of Escort Who Refused Sex

"A Texas jury acquitted a man for the murder of a woman he hired as an escort, after his lawyers claimed he was authorized to use deadly force because she refused sex.............Under Texas law, an individual is authorized to use deadly force to “retrieve stolen property at night,” and Gilbert’s lawyers cited that provision as justification for Gilbert’s action, reasoning that Frago had stolen $150 from him by taking his money without delivering sex."

Jury Acquits Texas Man For Murder Of Escort Who Refused Sex | ThinkProgress

Shooting a "prostitute" for refusing to have sex, which is illegal anyway, this is justification for murder? Just don't say No.

Týr · Post by **Týr** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 3:37 pm

On a point of information, does it really mean "retrieve stolen property at night" or should it say "retrieve property stolen at night"?

It's 85 years since England last had a law by which a man could demand and potentially take sexual congress by right, and even then one had to be married to the defendant and refusal did not authorize killing. The notion that a woman couldn't, under any other peacetime circumstance, say no, has simply never existed in England from time immemorial. Were I a Texas resident I'd move in protest.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 3:38 pm

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 3:41 pm

Týr;1429147 wrote: On a point of information, does it really mean "retrieve stolen property at night" or should it say "retrieve property stolen at night"?

It's 85 years since England last had a law by which a man could demand and potentially take sexual congress by right, and even then one had to be married to the defendant and refusal did not authorize killing. The notion that a woman couldn't, under any other peacetime circumstance, say no, has simply never existed in England from time immemorial. Were I a Texas resident I'd move in protest.

In answer to your query: It's Texas, you figure it out, or ask Accountable.

eta--Were I a Texas resident I'd move in protest---one reason why I, despite my travels, was never a Texas resident. I can't live with $h!t like this. I won't.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 3:41 pm

Ahso!;1429148 wrote: Wow!

I concur.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 3:52 pm

So they would have found him guilty if he had shot her during the day?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 3:56 pm

Bleeding hell...... thats sheer madness!!!!

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 4:03 pm

SnoozeAgain;1429153 wrote: So they would have found him guilty if he had shot her during the day?

It appears not, doesn't it? But, it is Texas after all, so who can be sure? I guess the jury was glad it took place at night, better for the old conscience, if one is available.

If anyone wants, you can sign a petition about this, not sure what good it will do, but probably better than doing nothing at all:

UltraViolet | Shot for refusing sex

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 4:06 pm

Bruv;1429154 wrote: Bleeding hell...... thats sheer madness!!!!

I concur.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 4:07 pm

This whole thing sickens me... she's dead over $150. I wonder what this guy's life span will be after this.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 4:09 pm

She was askin' for it.

I'm sure someone thinks that.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 4:15 pm

AnneBoleyn;1429160 wrote: She was askin' for it.

I'm sure someone thinks that.Would a prostitute also need to be a felon to be deserving of this fate, I wonder?

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 4:16 pm

Wow what a law.

I wonder how many times this crazy law has been used to justify murder?

Lawyer found a odd/crazy law that worked. They should be ashamed.

Patsy

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 4:18 pm

Týr;1429147 wrote: On a point of information, does it really mean "retrieve stolen property at night" or should it say "retrieve property stolen at night"?

It's 85 years since England last had a law by which a man could demand and potentially take sexual congress by right, and even then one had to be married to the defendant and refusal did not authorize killing. The notion that a woman couldn't, under any other peacetime circumstance, say no, has simply never existed in England from time immemorial. Were I a Texas resident I'd move in protest.It's possible the original had the word "darkie" in there someplace and it eventually got changed to "night" with slight rewording.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 5:26 pm

First of all, the OP link was misleading.

It wasn't a refusal for sex, it was the attempted theft of 150 bucks.

Gilbert testified earlier Tuesday that he had found Frago's escort ad on Craigslist and believed sex was included in her $150 fee. But instead, Frago walked around his apartment and after about 20 minutes left, saying she had to give the money to her driver, he said.

That driver, the defense contended, was Frago's pimp and her partner in the theft scheme.

MySA

Texas law does allow the use of deadly force to protect property.

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

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 5:30 pm

Patsy Warnick;1429163 wrote: Wow what a law.

I wonder how many times this crazy law has been used to justify murder?

Lawyer found a odd/crazy law that worked. They should be ashamed.

Patsy

Not murder in Texas.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Jun 07, 2013 7:17 pm

tude dog;1429168 wrote: Not murder in Texas.

Well, yeah. Nowhere does it say that she refused sex. It says she ran off with his money.

THAT's a big difference.

Not sure 150 bucks is worth chasing someone down and shooting them, but then I probably make more money that this guy did.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sun Jun 09, 2013 10:53 am

What do the women of texas think of this kind if thing? Presumably they do vote and have a say in matters. Might it also be that to some the worth of the life of a prostitute is little to non existent.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sun Jun 09, 2013 7:26 pm

So, legally speaking, it does not matter whether she was a prostitute or not. She tried to steal 150 dollars from the guy, and he use leagal (in Texas) means to retrieve his money.

If she did not want to provide sex, she should have just said, 'No." and given his money back.

So, it sounds to me like she was not a prostitute, but a a thief, trying to pull a scam. The follows her downstairs and he is confronted by her and her friend, he fells threatened and fires his gun.

I am sorry that she died, but when you are injured in the commission of a crime, that doesn't negate the crime.

I suspect this guy will not be looking for hookers on Craigslist, anymore.

The whole gun thing has been beat to death, and I will not go into that.

I do have an issue with the media and the inaccurate headlines.

Týr · Post by **Týr** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 6:32 am

Some people appear to have difficulty in distinguishing between an escort and a prostitute.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 7:16 am

LarsMac;1429279 wrote: I do have an issue with the media and the inaccurate headlines.

THINK PROGRESS is a editorial rag. No problem, I wouldn't look towards that for raw news.

There are regular sources of news such as this San Antonio newspaper reported it.

Jury acquits escort shooter

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 7:26 am

I could have used other sources, other links, more mainstream, but I listed the one I chose just for you tude dog.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 7:41 am

gmc;1429245 wrote: What do the women of texas think of this kind if thing? Presumably they do vote and have a say in matters. Might it also be that to some the worth of the life of a prostitute is little to non existent.

That was one of three situations I know of where somebody was shot in Texas where the Texas Penal Code - Section 9.42. Deadly Force To Protect Property came into play.

Joe Horn cleared by grand jury in Pasadena shootings

He shot and killed two burglars.

Texas Homeowner Uses Deadly Force to Protect Property

This guy shot and killed one thief stealing copper out of his work truck. Far as I know no charges have been filed against that guy.

Seems the only time charges are pressed is when a prostitute/thief/escort is killed. To be fair I don't know why charges were filed against Ezekiel Gilbert.

Seems to me, far as I understand the law the jury rendered a fair verdict.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 7:44 am

AnneBoleyn;1429293 wrote: I could have used other sources, other links, more mainstream, but I listed the one I chose just for you tude dog.

:guitarist Makes me just want to jump up and sing!:yh_dance

In other words, clear the room.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 7:54 am

LarsMac;1429172 wrote: Well, yeah. Nowhere does it say that she refused sex. It says she ran off with his money.

THAT's a big difference.

Not sure 150 bucks is worth chasing someone down and shooting them, but then I probably make more money that this guy did.

I wonder how much money he lost in lawyers fees and time off work. Not to mention telling the whole world how he spend his spare time.

Post by **LarsMac** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 7:58 am

Týr;1429290 wrote: Some people appear to have difficulty in distinguishing between an escort and a prostitute.

So it would seem.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 8:33 am

td: "Seems to me, far as I understand the law the jury rendered a fair verdict."

Since the murderer, IMO, was himself engaging in an illegal activity, sex for money, I don't think the law concerning a night theft applies to him at all. He was a culprit, too. A fair verdict at least would have made note of that & I think he should have been found for a negligent homicide, even if probation were his only punishment.

Wonder what would have happened if a drug dealer ripped off a buyer at night & the buyer killed the dealer.

Just because something is legal doesn't make it right. i.e., in NH my husband taught me to "never show your gun unless you intend to use it" & a police officer told me if I were ever robbed in my store I could wait till the robber was leaving, shoot him in the back, even kill him, & there would be no penalty for me. I wouldn't give the death penalty for a robbery.

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 8:48 am

It's TEXAS - there is no "figuring it out." That state is totally crazy....always has been as far back as I can remember. And a jury system goes horribly wrong when composed of crazy people. This is a state that puts juveniles and retarded people to death and recently began a "arm the neighborhood for free" campaign.

Did I mention the "mandatory ultrasound for women" law? Accountable is the ONLY sane Texan I know and he moved there from somewhere else. When I grew up, we always knew who the Texans were on the ski slopes. They were the ones with ridiculously expensive gear, shattering the mountain quiet by calling to each other at the top of their lungs, wearing cowboy hats instead of ski hats, and skiing over the tops of your skis in the lift lines....

Post by **LarsMac** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 9:51 am

I think it is sad that what seems to me to be a petty theft should result in such a terrible death. (The woman lived for 7 months, paralyzed, before dying) I think (even hope) this guy will have a lot of difficulty getting past this episode, regardless of the verdict. The only player who seems to get out of this in one piece is the guy that was probably the young lady's "Pimp" who will find (Probably has found) another young lady to do the same kind of thing, and many more stupid fellows will get beat out of a couple hundred bucks with the same kind of scam. The wrong person got shot, and the wrong person is probably going to suffer.

Life does go on.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 10:29 am

Why is it assumed that the escort was there for sex? Tyr brought that up but It's largely been ignored.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 10:41 am

Ahso!;1429324 wrote: Why is it assumed that the escort was there for sex? Tyr brought that up but It's largely been ignored.

It was the perp himself who assumed it, & I think it's a common assumption, but you have a point, ahso, in that one who is payed to "escort" will demand more payment for anything beyond that.

Post by **LarsMac** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 10:47 am

Ahso!;1429324 wrote: Why is it assumed that the escort was there for sex? Tyr brought that up but It's largely been ignored.

Who do you think has made that assumption?

Mr Gilbert is the only one that seems to have made that assumption.

Post by **LarsMac** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 10:49 am

There is an unspoken assertion among many that escort services are basically a front for prostitution businesses, and many times, that is the case.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 10:51 am

LarsMac;1429332 wrote: Who do you think has made that assumption?

Mr Gilbert is the only one that seems to have made that assumption.It appears the jury and/or judge had made that assumption as well. It just might be that the only person looking to engage in illegal activity was the shooter. Is there anything on testimony from either the girl or her alleged pimp?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 10:57 am

Strangely enough today I am just reading an old Michael Moore book, did you know the USA is amongst Iran,Nigeria,Pakistan,Saudi Arabia and Yemen that executes juveniles, that is under 18 year olds ?

Did you know only the USA and Somalia has failed to sign the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children.

You export freedom and it's ideals internationally by fire and dollar power,and the world considers you an advanced nation.

Heaven help us all........................

Post by **LarsMac** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 11:01 am

Ahso!;1429337 wrote: It appears the jury and/or judge had made that assumption as well. It just might be that the only person looking to engage in illegal activity was the shooter. Is there anything on testimony from either the girl or her alleged pimp?

Perhaps, but she did try to run off with his money.

Whatever the reason he gave her the money, he was expecting something in return, and she ran off with it.

The Jury was probably instructed to look at the specific charge of murder.

Fact. She and her friend in the car tried to take his money, and he acted to recover his property.

In Texas, using a firearm to recover your property is legal. End of story.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 11:05 am

LarsMac;1429345 wrote:

In Texas, using a firearm to recover your property is legal. End of story.

$150 ?????

£96.50 ???

You will cutting off hands soon.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 11:10 am

LarsMac;1429345 wrote: Perhaps, but she did try to run off with his money.

Whatever the reason he gave her the money, he was expecting something in return, and she ran off with it.

The Jury was probably instructed to look at the specific charge of murder.

Fact. She and her friend in the car tried to take his money, and he acted to recover his property.

In Texas, using a firearm to recover your property is legal. End of story.I thought she had said she was giving the money to her driver. That sounds to me like she was coming back. A lot sounds fishy from both sides but we didn't hear all the evidence.

You're right though; to shoot someone for $150.00 is just nuts. He could have wrestled the money away from her - he looks like a powerful enough guy and she appeared to be small enough.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 11:31 am

Bruv;1429340 wrote: Strangely enough today I am just reading an old Michael Moore book, did you know the USA is amongst Iran,Nigeria,Pakistan,Saudi Arabia and Yemen that executes juveniles, that is under 18 year olds ?

Did you know only the USA and Somalia has failed to sign the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children.

You export freedom and it's ideals internationally by fire and dollar power,and the world considers you an advanced nation.

Heaven help us all........................

USA, by Supreme Court Decision, no longer executes anyone who committed a crime while a juvenile.

"By a vote of 5-4, the U.S. Supreme Court on March 1, 2005 held that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments forbid the execution of offenders who were under the age of 18 when their crimes were committed."

U. S. Supreme Court: Roper v. Simmons, No. 03-633 | Death Penalty Information Center

Post by **LarsMac** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 11:52 am

Bruv;1429348 wrote: $150 ?????

£96.50 ???

You will cutting off hands soon.

I am not saying it's right. It's just legal. In Texas, anyway.

Post by **LarsMac** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 11:56 am

Ahso!;1429349 wrote: I thought she had said she was giving the money to her driver. That sounds to me like she was coming back...

Yeah, I knew a guy back in the sixties that used to rip off people who wanted to buy pot with that kind of line.

"yeah, so I gotta go around the corner and get the stuff from my brother. You wait here, and I'll be right back."

Uh huh.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 12:07 pm

Yeah, I know! Just grab her by the arm and take the money back. The guy does really appear to regret the situation, not that that's any consolation to the girl or those who lost her. 21 years old!

Post by **LarsMac** » Mon Jun 10, 2013 12:12 pm

Ahso!;1429371 wrote: Yeah, I know! Just grab her by the arm and take the money back. The guy does really appear to regret the situation, not that that's any consolation to the girl or those who lost her. 21 years old!

Yeah, then she screams rape, he goes to jail and she and the guy in the car go off to find another sucker.

It was a no-win situation for the guy. He should have just let her go, written it off on his expense report, and gone down to the bar for a drink.