Legal to murder a prostitute for non-compliance in the US?

[Beskar]

Example that pissed of a lot of people, girl was violently raped by a gang, but she had voluntary sex with the first guy, after that his buddies came in and they all had a go. Judge can't know when voluntary sex became rape so they all walked. It doesn't feel right at all but that's how it works

Over here, it is when the girl or guy says "No". If it occurs after this, then it is rape. Even if he groped and fondled her a little pre-rape and she seemed to like it.

[Ronin]

In Texas they really take the "customer is always right" thing to heart.

[Fragony]

Over here, it is when the girl or guy says "No". If it occurs after this, then it is rape. Even if he groped and fondled her a little pre-rape and she seemed to like it.

But the judge can't know at which point she said no, so they all walk. There are so many bizar cases like this, another example, after a fatal hit and run from two robbers who were fleeing from the police both of the suspect claimed they weren't the one who was driving. Can't be proved who was driving so charges on hit and run were dropped despite both of them causing a lot of grieve

[Vuk]

The strongest point of the American justice system is also its most flawed: Jury of your peers. All you need is a bunch of sympathetic idiots who have no understanding of or regard for the law. That is how O. J. Simpson got off and that is how this guy got off.

[Fragony]

The strongest point of the American justice system is also its most flawed: Jury of your peers. All you need is a bunch of sympathetic idiots who have no understanding of or regard for the law. That is how O. J. Simpson got off and that is how this guy got off.

It's pretty frontierish. Jury's should get a say in what punishment someone ought be be getting as a mere recommendation at most imho, certainly not if someone is guilty or not, just to feel the temperature of the water. Much to be done there

[Vuk]

It's pretty frontierish. Jury's should get a say in what punishment someone ought be be getting as a mere recommendation at most imho, certainly not if someone is guilty or not, just to feel the temperature of the water. Much to be done there

Nah, they shouldn't decide the punishment. They would either be too vindictive or let him off scott-free most times I'd think. Not to mention they would never agree with so many variables. Look at the hard time they have with a simple Guilty/Not Guilty.

As many problems as it creates, having the right to trial by jury is an essential safeguard against tyrrany and does much more good than harm.

[gaelic cowboy]

the old joke was you couldnt get a verdict from a Clare jury

supposedly they ruled "Not guilty if he gives back the horse"

judges says you cannot do that

"Ok then guilty and he can keep the horse"






suposedly there was a case of a publican charged with having people in his pub after closing time.

publican admitted to his offence an said he was guilty so far so open and shut yea.

nah the jury commented that the publican was known as a notorious liar and so they disregared his statements and rulled innocent.

lets just say the drink were free that evening

[Sarmatian]

As many problems as it creates, having the right to trial by jury is an essential safeguard against tyrrany and does much more good than harm.

But, it also leaves the door open for another kind of tyranny - tyranny of the majority. If the majority have a very low opinion of you, like in this case a prostitute, you may find that you're not equal before the law...

[HoreTore]

But, it also leaves the door open for another kind of tyranny - tyranny of the majority. If the majority have a very low opinion of you, like in this case a prostitute, you may find that you're not equal before the law...

Indeed.

I trust the judgement of the trained professional over the village idiot any day of the week.

As for "defense against tyranny": if the judges are corrupted we're so far into fascism we're screwed anyway. So that's a moot point.