I avoided reading it for a while, maybe because of the red thumbs down someone slapped on it - what is that supposed to mean? That it is about a particularly horrible crime or that the criminal should not be criticized because he has one swinging and is therefore a member of the Blue Team and must be supported no matter what by all his "brothers"?
This is a vicious murder of a woman sex worker by a customer guy. Any one who defends the murdered is making himself an accessory to the violent crime wave against women and particularly sex workers by men that has been going on forever and looks to continue until our deeply flawed species takes its pace on evolutions' discard pile. It is dangerous being a woman in world ful of violently misogynistic men and much more dangerous to be a woman in the commercial sex business.
The truth of that is why I have no objections to the means women use to attempt to avoid finding themselves naked and alone in a locked room with a man who hates women (all of them), is larger and stronger than they are, is experienced with violence and may have armed himself. The means, screening, are not very good but some Customer Guys object to any effort at all to determine whether they might be psycho killers and prefer to rave about their supposed risk : "My wife might find out!!!"
While I appreciate Gneiss Guy's efforts to explain to the more stupid why they really do not want to attempt to "Pull an Ezekiel" the next time they are unhappy with a session, the fact it was necessary is appalling. That is was necessary was quickly established by the Band of Brothers who self posted alerts on themselves.
I would disagree with the nearly always reasonable GG about the sacredness of "jury nullification" as always an effective means of restraining government power. Juries that enforced a law other than the one in the law books protected a reign of terror for a hundred years throughout the former confederate Sourh against people the jury men hated and feared. A lot of people hate and fear sexworkers.
I very much hope the "Feds" bring deprivation of civil rights charges against the San Antonio murderer- subjecting the victim to seven months paralyzed torture on a ventilator until the consequences of the wound he chose to inflict finally killed her would seem to qualify. Not that is not very likely given the passive nature of the present Administration but perhaps the Federal Prosecutor for San Antonio is feeling as humiliated by the state jury's actions as I am. Originally Posted by greymouse
As was stated I don't believe he should have resorted to violence but this hardly falls under the crimes against sex workers profile implying that he premeditated, hired her and attacked without provocation.
Yes he is a murderer in as much as none of us would resort to physical violence in this case but the point is she was also a criminal in the process of ripping him off which in turn set him off.
I doubt a jury of twelve which included women would have let him walk if they viewed him as an attacker of sex workers.
If my opinion is considered self alert worthy then fine. Let all providers who intend to rip me off be alerted that while I have never raised a hand to a woman in my life, I do empathize with any individual man or woman who won't just lie down and let someone blatantly rip them off.
These thieves are counting on the fact that clients are afraid of the law when they pull this crap. Victims my ass.
She was a Thief who was shot for stealing. She was not simply another poor fallen victimized sex worker.
oh and I'm middle aged and white , care to test me ?
