Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For those creatures who think about stealing from others, risking death might make them think twice.
Every state needs a law like this.
I see you're still living in the 1800's. He gave her the money. Now, in a normal world, if someone pays for a business transaction & that transaction is not done, they're taken to court. Civilized people do not take out their gun & shoot the person. That's for knuckle-draggers, which there seem to be a lot of people with that mentality.
If she committed theft then yes. Something doesn't make sense though. If he gave her the money and she left without providing sex, then it is failure to perform - a civil tort - not theft.
I see you're still living in the 1800's. He gave her the money. Now, in a normal world, if someone pays for a business transaction & that transaction is not done, they're taken to court. Civilized people do not take out their gun & shoot the person. That's for knuckle-draggers, which there seem to be a lot of people with that mentality.
I don't think its "knuckle draggers." Now, this man gave her money and she didn't produce. Do you truly think a lawsuit is going to occur over this? What judge is going to rule in his favor?
People are getting sick and tired of a group of people using another group of people and nothing is being done about it. Yes, the idiot shouldn't be seeing prostitutes. I get that and I do not condone his actions. I'm merely saying, more of this type of activity is going to occur. More people will be killed and injured, as a populace gets sick and tired of being abused by a group of criminals and nothing can be done about it.
Making this even more of a travesty, come to think of it. How can this even be theft in a legal sense? He parted with the money with the intent of committing an illegal act. Damn, that's one backwards-ass state.
Exactly.
But in Texas, a trinket is apparently worth a human life. The jury must have thought that the woman was nothing but a living trinket.
All the idiot had to do to secure his money was copy down the car's license plate number.
Not at all exactly, the requirement that the contract be legal, in order to be enforceable, is NATION WIDE..
How the hell can you guys not know basic 101 of the laws governing society in which you live?
Making this even more of a travesty, come to think of it. How can this even be theft in a legal sense? He parted with the money with the intent of committing an illegal act. Damn, that's one backwards-ass state.
Taking property that belongs to someone else is theft. It has nothign to do with the state, its basic law.. once again, how the hell can you guys not know the laws under which you live?
Generally, a person commits the crime of theft of property if he or she:
Knowingly obtains or exerts unauthorized control over the property of another, with intent to deprive the owner of his or her property;
Knowingly obtains by deception control over the property of another, with intent to deprive the owner of his or her property; or
Knowingly obtains or exerts control over property in the custody of a law enforcement agency which was explicitly represented to the person by an agent of the law enforcement agency as being stolen.
A court will not enforce a contract to perform an illegal act (obviously), but the lack of enforceability doesn't change the type of breach. One thing is clear, this was not theft. If this legal reasoning is valid then a drug dealer that shoots another for nonpayment should also be acquitted.
I hope she has surviving relatives with some balls. If there's any justice in this universe, this piece of thrash needs to be sued in civil court until he's turning tricks to survive.
A court will not enforce a contract to perform an illegal act (obviously), but the lack of enforceability doesn't change the type of breach. One thing is clear, this was not theft. If this legal reasoning is valid then a drug dealer that shoots another for nonpayment should also be acquitted.
Drug dealer A shoots drug dealer B, drug dealer A is brought up on drug charges.
I'm sure the man in question could be charged with be a "John"... yeah, slap him with a fine, that'll teach him...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
