cliftonite
Diamond Member
- Jul 15, 2001
- 6,899
- 63
- 91
What crime was he convicted of?
He admitted to soliciting a prostitute.
What crime was he convicted of?
What crime was the woman he killed convicted of?What crime was he convicted of?
Uh, seriously?What crime was the woman he killed convicted of?
She was not convicted of a crime. He killed her when it was not necessary. This was not self-defense. He killed her over the price of a blowjob. In Texas, apparently that is legal. Hence the need to warn folks to stay out of Texas as it is a totally fucked up place.Uh, seriously?
Would you say the same about a person who killed a murderer in self-defense?
Uh, seriously?
Would you say the same about a person who killed a murderer in self-defense?
Yeah they are, didn't you know?Because they are totally the same thing.....
Uh, seriously?
Would you say the same about a person who killed a murderer in self-defense?
Reason why I criticize Texas so much. It's murder. I should be surprised he even went to trial.
This is getting too deep for me. I'm out.I think he was pointing out that it's a ludicrous statement to claim that the man is not a criminal when he admitted to an illegal activity (soliciting prostitution) but was never found guilty whereas the woman is a criminal because she committed an illegal act (robbery) although she never was convicted of a crime. They're either both criminals or neither is; you can't just arbitrarily brand one of them a criminal because you approve of his actions more than hers (or vice versa).
This is your opinion, and a Texas jury clearly disagrees with you.
NOT murder. Murder is *unlawful* killing with malice aforethought, and a Texas court determined that this killing was not unlawful.
Something is missing from this version of the story. I just know something is but too lazy to dig deeper.
He admitted to soliciting a prostitute.