Aqcuittal for shooting Escort. Services not rendered.

I was always under the belief that using a gun during the commission of a crime escalated charges. I'm unclear how this would be different that shooting someone over another type of illegal transaction.

Wow that is some fucked up shit!!! Damn.

While it escalated the charges...

The jury found the guy 'not guilty'

The defense lawyer EASILY cost $30,000 and I think MORE like $50,000+ !!

Do you think he should have just let her go? Yes he would be out $150 but he could sleep that night. Except he had nightmares for 3 1/2 years

Yup, its fucked up. Every now and them some sorry motherfucker gets away with murde. Casey Anthony, OJ, Robert Blake, ect. Its a damn shame.

While it escalated the charges...

The jury found the guy 'not guilty'

The defense lawyer EASILY cost $30,000 and I think MORE like $50,000+ !!

Do you think he should have just let her go? Yes he would be out $150 but he could sleep that night. Except he had nightmares for 3 1/2 years Originally Posted by instfixer

True. It ended up being the most expensive session of his life. I'm not a lawyer, I would have thought the fact that it was an illegal transaction would have negated the robbery and the jury would have been instructed as such. I guess not.

True. It ended up being the most expensive session of his life. I'm not a lawyer, I would have thought the fact that it was an illegal transaction would have negated the robbery and the jury would have been instructed as such. I guess not. Originally Posted by Roger.Smith

So under your theory, if you go to a prostitute and pay her for sex, which in Texas is illegal, can she shoot you and not be prosecuted, because you don't have "clean hands"?

clean hands doctrine n. a rule of law that a person coming to court with a lawsuit or petition for a court order must be free from unfair conduct (have "clean hands" or not have done anything wrong) in regard to the subject matter of his/her claim. His/her activities not involved in the legal action can be abominable since it is considered irrelevant. As an affirmative defense (positive response) a defendant might claim the plaintiff (party suing him/her) has a "lack of clean hands" or "violates the clean hands doctrine" because the plaintiff has misled the defendant or has done something wrong regarding the matter under consideration. Example: A former partner sues on a claim that he was owed money on a consulting contract with the partnershiip when he left, but the defense states that the plaintiff (party suing) has tried to get customers from the partnership by spreading untrue stories about the remaining partner's business practices. (See: affirmative defense)
Copyright © 1981-2005 by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill. All Right reserved.

Ethics and logic? I abhor anyone who thinks this is a case of "she got what was coming".
The legal codes? Any good defense lawyer will use this, it's their job.
This specific law? I don't care for it but it swings both ways.
Ezekiel Gilbert? Really? A machine gun while she leaves? If you believe this is right in your head, it's your head that should be checked.
The jury? Disgusting.

It is an absolute shame that this travesty of justice occurred in the United States of America. Reading that made me sick....

This is just wrong. Maybe the Mexican Mafia will set it right. If anyone deserves a bullet behind the ear it is this asshole.
Killing a young pretty girl over $150 lousy dollars. Un fukin believable.

<snip>... I would have thought the fact that it was an illegal transaction would have negated the robbery and the jury would have been instructed as such. I guess not. Originally Posted by Roger.Smith

In the Maine Zumba case, the judge ruled because the act was illegal, clients had no expectation of privacy regarding the illegally video recording of the session... Some legal scholars said it was narrow focused and wouldn't likely set a precedent...

Roger, everyone, read the Texas statutes on use of force and use of deadly force.

You might be surprised by what you learn.

Use of force statutes aside,

1) a deplorable act - violent reaction to a "theft" of cash. I am assuming this happened in the man's house and not in a hotel room which might have made a difference.

2) a jury presented, most likely, with judicial instructions regarding the statutes. Cannot blame the jurors in this instance, even if they wanted to revolt and find him guilty.

3) karma rulez and the provider's survivors will (if they haven't already) file a serious civil suit despite the criminal jury's verdict.

Yes there is some culpability on the part of the provider's for cash and dash, but the consequences seriously out of whack with the act.

Karma will more or less make things even, especially if the jerk with the weapon has a handle anywhere on an escort board and gets outed there. No doubt his physical address plus his name are easily discovered.

Wow, this is good news. Good riddance to the thief.

So does this mean all girls that do cash and dash or fuck you over are fair game

Damn right skirtchaser.