Its ok to kill a hooker if she does not provide for you in Texas

damn that shit sucks..i dont fuck with craigslist or bp no more. too many girls just trying to screw you over. im sticking wit eccie for a while!

i cant lie though..i have slapped a hoe once for taking m money and not doing what she was supposed to ;(. but i aint killing no one Originally Posted by chiwawa

Stay classy

She was a thief and I can live with the verdict. From the reports he was not attempting to shoot her so while I agree with those that say it was not worth killing for I think that this falls into more of a bad things can happen if you take risks category. They both took risks. My only regret is that it was the prostitute and not the pimp that was killed. He was probably the one giving her the orders. I also would hope that a prostitute ripped off by a customer would get the same verdict. In Texas I do think that she might.

On the bright side, escorts now have a legal precedence to shoot anyone who leaves without paying.

Texas ladies, start packing heat!

And not just some sissy 22 purse pistol, a genuine AK-47, so you don't have to worry about aiming, just pull the trigger and let her rip! tires or necks, it's all the same in the Lone Star state!!

Already packing but, don't pull your weapon unless you are prepared to use it. It better be life threating. And don't forget when you call 911 tell them you were scared for your life and ask them to send an ambulance. That does work in Texas :-)

Occupation has nothing to do with, only b/c what she does and he was asking for is illegal so it made headlines. But in the end, she was stealing and he has the right to stop her. Whether it was 0.25 cents or 25K, he's still in the right. She should have asked herself if 150$ is all her life is worth.

Sometime back a few months ago someone stole gasoline from my truck, if I had caught him in the act I would have protected my property, as it was, police caught him and he went to jail for that along with outstanding warrants.

It's not my fault if someone chooses to go that route and risk his/her life, that person decides how much their life is worth, not me. Although the illegal sex never took place, I wonder if he'll loose his CCL, if he had one?

I agree with the verdict.

The fact that she was leaving with his money, at night, the courts interpreted as robbery.. Which it was if she took his money and gave him nothing in return. If she had been a junkie or purses snatcher, or had robbed his house as a burglar for that same $150, we would not be having this conversation. Originally Posted by Luxury Daphne

dammit....i was heading here to post that link.

Well said Luxury Daphne. The end result is simply the literal application of the law disregarding all extraneous factors. Originally Posted by Eclipse

You both still completely miss the point that a contract for illegal services is not enforceable by law. The only way to classify this as robbery in legal terms is if the agreement between them for sex in exchange for money were legally recognized and enforceable. In the absence of that, all we have here is that while engaging in criminal activity himself, he got double screwed by getting scammed.

Not to mention the fact that we will never hear her side of the story because she is, well.....dead.

All this is just Monday morning quarterbacking though. Twelve dumbasses bought his sob story, and that's the end of it.

She was alive for a few months, she was shot in the neck and I think paralyzed and died a few months later, I assume she was coherent and no doubt questioned by authorities. But Texas law states that at night, you can use deadly force since you may not see if the perp has a weapon. He chased her outside where it was dark and shot her, not knowing if she had a weapon on her person.

No different than someone walking in your house and walking out with your TV, would you just sit there and watch them? Maybe hold the door for them?

Sleazy thievin' bitch! Should've shot her damn dog, too!

Old Dingus

Also, theft is now legally defined as miscommunication of trade. So, if the hobbiest only pays $200 when you agreed on $300, and he leaves without paying the remaining $100, you legally have the right to shoot him.

The fact that she was leaving with his money, at night, the courts interpreted as robbery.. Which it was if she took his money and gave him nothing in return. Originally Posted by Luxury Daphne

But she did give him something. She gave him 20 mins of her time, the only thing she can legally give as an escort.

No different than someone walking in your house and walking out with your TV, would you just sit there and watch them? Maybe hold the door for them? Originally Posted by hd

It is very different. He gave her $150 for 30 mins of her time. She stayed for 20, he got irritate, she left. An exchange of currency for a service was made.

This is no robbery, just a miscommunication of detail of service.

I guess if I sold my TV thru CL and the buyer came by in the evening to see it, picked up my TV and walked out without paying for it, I would have no recourse and should leave him go? Maybe even tell him I hope he enjoys it.

I just hope he's under the TV when he falls dead so my TV is broken.

I'm interpreting this as he was the hobbiest and he paid her for the
service,she tried to leave and he got mad and shot her,well she shouldn't
have tried to take the money and just leave,she knew the risk of doing that.

He shouldn't have shot her,at those legal costs will catch up to him
lesson learned IF YOU DON'T WANT TO PROVIDE DON'T TAKE THE MONEY!!
IF YOU LOSE $200.00 JUST TAKE A LOSE.

I guess if I sold my TV thru CL and the buyer came by in the evening to see it, picked up my TV and walked out without paying for it, I would have no recourse and should leave him go? Maybe even tell him I hope he enjoys it.

I just hope he's under the TV when he falls dead so my TV is broken. Originally Posted by hd

It is legal to sell your TV. You keep missing the salient point here. He had no legal standing to claim she scammed him by backing out of an agreement that was illegal.

Lets look at this another way. Lets say that rather than shoot her, he instead calls 911 and reports the 'theft'. So he tells the police that he engaged in an illegal activity by offering to pay her for sex, but rather than follow through with her end of the bargain she left with his money instead.

Care to wager on the likelihood that the police would arrest her and charge her with theft? Now, different states have different laws of course, but this exact situation has happened more than a few times, although I'm not aware of any cases in TX so that we can compare the two. Chances are though, that the police might indeed have arrested her, but the charge would probably have been solicitation instead of theft, and they probably would have arrested him as well.

That verdict was even more idiotic than such a monstrous revenge over such a trivial incident.

. . . That should be patently obvious to anyone with a modicum of discernment living in this century, but apparently some people still live in the dark ages.

Occupation has nothing to do with, only b/c what she does and he was asking for is illegal so it made headlines. But in the end, she was stealing and he has the right to stop her. Whether it was 0.25 cents or 25K, he's still in the right. She should have asked herself if 150$ is all her life is worth.

Sometime back a few months ago someone stole gasoline from my truck, if I had caught him in the act I would have protected my property, as it was, police caught him and he went to jail for that along with outstanding warrants.

It's not my fault if someone chooses to go that route and risk his/her life, that person decides how much their life is worth, not me. Although the illegal sex never took place, I wonder if he'll loose his CCL, if he had one?

I agree with the verdict. Originally Posted by hd