Jury acquits man who killed prostitute because she would not have sex with him - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

cmac2012 · #16 06-11-2013, 03:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rs899

No, Texas Law Does Not Say You Can Shoot an Escort Who Refuses to Have Sex

I can agree with this statement, having been a juror on a murder trial that didn't go the way some wished:

"When I see all of that effort boiled down to one ridiculous headline like "It's Legal to Shoot Prostitutes In Texas," I go nuts. I ask people these questions: Were you there every day of the trial? Were you on the jury? Did you deliberate with the other jurors? No? Then SHUT UP. You don't know the first thing about what went on."

Meanwhile, about 10 miles from here the jury for the Trevon Martin/Zimmerman trial is being formed. I need to get out of town....

I'm sorry, I don't see any way this can be spun. As your article noted, it is alleged that the escort never promised sex. I haven't seen a copy of her ad but few such ads state 'I will come to your residence and engage in sexual congress with you for a pre-arranged sum.'

The guy appears to have approx zero street smarts. He all but forfeited his manhood for life on this one. Whether he intended to kill or not by his own admission he intended to fire a rifle in the direction of her vehicle. Perhaps the prosecution is at fault for insisting on a murder conviction. Not sure why the option for a lesser charge isn't on the table. I would agree that, say, 1st degree murder would not be accurate and perhaps 2nd degree not as well. But assaulting with a deadly weapon and some kind of wrongful death charge should have been an option.

cmac2012 · #17 06-11-2013, 03:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skippy

Prostitution is legal in Nevada, and I haven't heard of anything like that happening here.

Well, that is a point, being legal gives it more room to operate out of the shadows. But I suspect bait and switch maneuvers happen in the unsanctioned areas of Nevada prostitution. I gather it's not wide open legal everywhere there.

Prostitution in Nevada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:

The U.S. state of Nevada is notably the only American jurisdiction to allow legal prostitution, albeit only in highly regulated brothels. Prostitution outside these licensed brothels is illegal under Nevada law, as elsewhere in the U.S.

The brothels are mainly situated in isolated rural areas, with Nevada's more heavily populated counties outlawing prostitution. The vast majority of Nevada's population lives in counties where all forms of prostitution are illegal, namely Clark (which contains Las Vegas), Washoe (which contains Reno), Douglas, and Lincoln counties, and Carson City (an independent city). The other counties allow brothels, but some of these counties currently have no active brothels (brothels are in operation in only 8 counties); as of June/July 2008 there were 28 legal brothels in Nevada.

rs899 · #18 06-11-2013, 07:29 AM

Quote:

But assaulting with a deadly weapon and some kind of wrongful death charge should have been an option.

Aye, there's the rub. Apparently, it wasn't. I say apparently because I wasn't a member of that particular jury. I did not get the instructions given out by that particular judge on that particular trial. Not being on that jury, I was not instructed by the judge to ignore this or that particular testimony, or to go back in the jury room while the attys hashed something out that would be inadmissable.

My point is that it is pointless to try to make a point on verdicts.

We aren't presented with the "facts' as seen by the jury.

MTUpower · #19 06-11-2013, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pooka

The best part of all of this is that Conservatives are falling all over themselves defending the guys' right to kill anyone that refuses to go through with a criminal activity the guy admits he was an active part of.

Perhaps you follow "conservatives" and know what they are doing- or perhaps you are listening to LWNJ talk shows. Can you tell us about either one?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pooka

But......

This law was enacted during the 1880's when the only light at night came from the Moon. Crime increased during two parts of the month: During the time the Moon was full since it was easier to see at night and during the time the Moon was dark since it was easier to steal something and not be seen. Sundown is when night starts and sunup is when day starts for the purposes of this law.

The law makes it a criminal offense to use deadly force during the pursuit of a thief in the daytime but legal to do so at night. The best example of this case was in Fort Worth about 35 years ago when a guy shot a thief who was fleeing his shop in downtown at one minute after sundown. The shop owner killed the thief from one block away with a rifle of some type, and the time was noted by several people in the area due to the presence of a large clock outside of another shop.

And that law is what the fellow in this case used as a defense.

The law makes no mention of what duty the wronged party has in protecting the public while they are firing a weapon into the darkness.

You don't like old laws? Well write your congressperson and ask them to change them. In the mean time you could ask a lawyer to not use old laws to the advantage of clients. See how far either one of those gets you and report back.

Until then your view is unrealistic in this case.

MTUpower · #20 06-11-2013, 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

I'm sorry, I don't see any way this can be spun. As your article noted, it is alleged that the escort never promised sex. I haven't seen a copy of her ad but few such ads state 'I will come to your residence and engage in sexual congress with you for a pre-arranged sum.'

The guy appears to have approx zero street smarts. He all but forfeited his manhood for life on this one. Whether he intended to kill or not by his own admission he intended to fire a rifle in the direction of her vehicle. Perhaps the prosecution is at fault for insisting on a murder conviction. Not sure why the option for a lesser charge isn't on the table. I would agree that, say, 1st degree murder would not be accurate and perhaps 2nd degree not as well. But assaulting with a deadly weapon and some kind of wrongful death charge should have been an option.

You were not there and your view is jumping to conclusions which the jury decided were not enough to convict. If you think you can be a better prosecutor than the one in this case then knock yourself out trying. Ask MTI for some help perhaps. In the mean time I'd suggest you quit using FOX news tactics of spinning to get others to espouse your views. It's degrading.

cmac2012 · #21 06-11-2013, 12:50 PM

Stop, you're breaking my heart. This is a weird story, no matter how you look at it. One thing is clear, the gentleperson thought he could improve his outcome with use of a gun and it sorta backfired, NPI.

rs899 · #22 06-11-2013, 01:15 PM

Sure, it's weird, that's why you are reading about it in California though it happened in Texas.

It's another example of prosecution overreach. Casey Anthony is at large because of it, but if you believe in karma or the afterlife or God in any form, she's gonna get it.

cmac2012 · #23 06-11-2013, 01:41 PM

I've heard of trials where the larger charge was acquitted but the lesser charges not. Doesn't make sense from the standpoint of actual justice to have an all or nothing approach. No doubt this question has arisen many times.

I have read more than once of prosecutors who didn't seem especially bright.

alamostation · #24 06-11-2013, 09:39 PM

As the song in the Music Man says "you gotta know the territory."

To expect the Berreras to lose a case in South Texas would be like betting against the Adams in colonial Boston or Lincoln in rural Illinois.

San Antonio has never attracted the quality assistant DA's that could be found in Dallas or Ft. Worth. It is not surprising that the Berreras could whip up on them.

My only questions would be:

Was it really Roy Berrera, Jr. since Sr. would be about 80+ years old?

Were the Berreras in it for the money or the notoriety?

Botnst · #25 06-11-2013, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

I've heard of trials where the larger charge was acquitted but the lesser charges not. Doesn't make sense from the standpoint of actual justice to have an all or nothing approach. No doubt this question has arisen many times.

I have read more than once of prosecutors who didn't seem especially bright.

OJ comes to mind.

cmac2012 · #26 06-12-2013, 01:52 AM

In their defense, I can imagine it could be a weird job. I wonder how often a prosecutor is involved in a case where he begins to suspect the defendant is actually innocent yet he is obligated to carry on as though he were guilty as sin.

But this case is weird. It's as if gangsterism has been given a legal stamp of approval. Since the aggrieved party can't go to legal authorities with a complaint along the lines of "so I saw her escort ad and called her up cause I wanted some nookie, and everyone knows that's the implicit agreement but she comes over, I hand her $150 and all of a sudden, she has a different POV about what she was going to do for the $$ than I do, she does her little dance number and makes to split with my money."

You can't enter into a contract for illegal activity so the only way to enforce such things is with brute force, which the guy attempted to do, and the law is apparently giving him its blessing.

She didn't break into his house and steal the money at gunpoint, HE HANDED HER THE MONEY.

Skippy · #27 06-12-2013, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

In their defense, I can imagine it could be a weird job. I wonder how often a prosecutor is involved in a case where he begins to suspect the defendant is actually innocent yet he is obligated to carry on as though he were guilty as sin.

I could be wrong-Where's Jim B? He would know-but I recall being told that if the prosecutor comes to believe the accused is innocent, then he's to decline to prosecute the case.

cmac2012 · #28 06-12-2013, 01:24 PM

Come to think of it, I recall a case like that, not the specifics but the fact that the prosecutors dropped the case. I imagine that would happen in cases where new evidence came to light that was overwhelming.

Can't Know · #29 06-12-2013, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skippy

I could be wrong-Where's Jim B? He would know-but I recall being told that if the prosecutor comes to believe the accused is innocent, then he's to decline to prosecute the case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Come to think of it, I recall a case like that, not the specifics but the fact that the prosecutors dropped the case. I imagine that would happen in cases where new evidence came to light that was overwhelming.

It's not a question of "coming to believe" anything.

Such cases are those in which there is exculpatory evidence that comes to light, such as someone else being captured who has articles belonging to the victim, knows details of the crime and confesses, etc. It's a case of "no question" that they simply have the wrong guy.

That's not this case. There is no question that this guy was the shooter, right? Rather, he has a defense, and it's up to the jury to decide whether on balance he is guilty of the crime charged.

The gray area cases are the ones where the prosecutor has to initially decide whether to charge the defendant in the first place (think George Zimmerman). But once charged, absent exculpatory evidence the prosecution will still follow through with the case and leave it to the jury to decide.

davidmash · #30 06-12-2013, 04:43 PM

What I take issue with is that the defense was able to successfully argue that the use of deadly force to prevent a theft was justified. How can one use deadly force to prevent a theft when there is no proof that a theft took place (is there a contract where sex was agreed to be provided in exchange for money) and secondly even if there were a contract how does one enforce a contract that is illegal in the first place (prostitution is not legal in TX so far as I know)?

This entire thing does not make much sense to me but then again this is TX so I am not sure what one can expect.