Oopsie.. Wife convicted after husband shoots 'rapist.'

Manic Moran · 03-05-2008 3:27pm #1

Been sortof following this one over the last while. Conviction came through today.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/03/texas.slaying.ap/index.html

Points to her for quick thinking. Points detracted for utter stupidity and not thinking things through.

Woman's having an affair, husband comes home early to find them at it in the boyfriend's truck. Husband is, of course, totally unaware of any spousal infidelity.

He expresses his surprise and displeasure at what he sees. Wife has the great idea to cry 'I'm being raped!' before bailing out of the truck. Bad move.

The thing is, this was Texas. Texans (a) tend to be a bit old-fashioned about things like rape, and (b) tend to be armed. Infuriated at the violation of his wife, and generally not liking the concepts of rapists at large in the first place anyway, he shot the boyfriend as he attempted to escape, killing him.

Of course, the truth came out in the wash, and the wife was hauled in on manslaughter charges. Faces anywhere from 2 to 20 years. I wonder if there's a lesson to be learned here...?

NTM

slipss · 03-05-2008 3:34pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

I wonder if there's a lesson to be learned here...?

If you ever get caught raping someone just claim they are making it up to hide your affair with them?

Sherifu · 03-05-2008 3:37pm

Surprise sex comes with risks.

AckwelFoley · 03-05-2008 3:39pm

Sherifu wrote: »

Surprise sex comes with risks.

lol.

Kinda like suprise buttsekz kitty.

Dave! · 03-05-2008 3:41pm

Jayzus I don't know who is the greater scumbag in the story, the wife or the husband...

Caoimhín · 03-05-2008 3:41pm

Youd get that in Athlone too i suppose.

Oswald Osbourne · 03-05-2008 3:42pm

I guess the husband shouldn't bring a gun with him on prison visits cos he's gonna be hearing a lot of that from her for the next 20.

Mr. CooL ICE · 03-05-2008 3:43pm

slipss wrote: »

If you ever get caught raping someone just claim they are making it up to hide your affair with them?

*gets jar of rohypnol and heads out*

Toto Wolfcastle · 03-05-2008 3:43pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

I wonder if there's a lesson to be learned here...?

Don't marry a crazy man? And if you insist on marrying a crazy man don't have an affair? And if you get caught having an affair by the crazy man run very fast?

Bob the Builder · 03-05-2008 3:44pm

it's her own fault.

Ponster · 03-05-2008 4:07pm

Errr, I don't see why some of you think that what the husband did was wrong?

If you were armed and found someone raping your wife you wouldn't shoot?

robby^5 · 03-05-2008 4:08pm

Ahh here the husband didnt just shoot someone for the sake of it, he thaught his was being raped, he reacted accordingly imo, its not his fault his wife is a tool, she totally deserves everything she gets... what an idiot.

Manic Moran · 03-05-2008 4:22pm

Ponster wrote: »

Errr, I don't see why some of you think that what the husband did was wrong?

Arguably at the time of the shooting there was no immediate threat to safety. The wife was out of the truck, and the boyfriend was fleeing. As a result, the husband was the person originally arrested for murder.

However, the laws do allow for the use of deadly force to prevent escape in certain circumstances. Given what it turned out the husband 'knew' at the time, the Grand Jury no-billed him (i.e. refused to indict) and instead indicted the wife for setting the chain of events in motion.

NTM

Kold · 03-05-2008 4:26pm

robby^5 wrote: »

Ahh here the husband didnt just shoot someone for the sake of it, he thaught his was being raped, he reacted accordingly imo, its not his fault his wife is a tool, she totally deserves everything she gets... what an idiot.

He 'thought' she was being raped. This is why trials exist, they should both go down for murder. Another reason why guns shouldn't be allowed.

Ponster · 03-05-2008 4:31pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

Arguably at the time of the shooting there was no immediate threat to safety. The wife was out of the truck, and the boyfriend was fleeing.

The point is that for the husband it was a rapist who was running away, not a boyfriend.

Ponster · 03-05-2008 4:34pm

Kold wrote: »

He 'thought' she was being raped. This is why trials exist, they should both go down for murder. Another reason why guns shouldn't be allowed.

Different country - different laws. People in Ireland complain that homeowners don't get enough protection from the law when it comes to defending their property. You can only use as much force as the intruder uses against you. In Texas you have the right to shoot someone on your property, be they armed or not.

Manic Moran · 03-05-2008 4:45pm

Kold wrote: »

He 'thought' she was being raped. This is why trials exist, they should both go down for murder.

It's a bit more than 'thought', he had very good reason to believe. I think any reasonable person would have come to a similar conclusion. It's a little rough to punish someone for acting in the best belief which pretty much any person around would have thought the same.

NTM

Lockstep · 03-05-2008 4:56pm

Moral grey area IMHO.

Put yourself in the husbands shoes, sees wife getting jiggy and she tells him she's being raped. What else is going to think?

MooseJam · 03-05-2008 4:57pm

good to see she wen't down, well deserved

Smellyirishman · 03-05-2008 4:59pm

MooseJam wrote: »

good to see she wen't down, well deserved

There's a video?!

Kold · 03-05-2008 5:02pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

It's a bit more than 'thought', he had very good reason to believe. I think any reasonable person would have come to a similar conclusion. It's a little rough to punish someone for acting in the best belief which pretty much any person around would have thought the same.

NTM

It's completely legitimate to punish someone for killing someone who was not actually a rapist. He shot to kill and murdered an innocent(ish) man.

Lockstep · 03-05-2008 5:06pm

Kold wrote: »

It's completely legitimate to punish someone for killing someone who was not actually a rapist. He shot to kill and murdered an innocent(ish) man.

I'm unsure as to how criminal law works but in contract law, a big thing is the "Objective Outsider".

Think about it, an objective outsider WOULD think it was a rapist due to the situation and the words of his wife.

EamonnKeane · 03-05-2008 5:13pm

Ponster wrote: »

Different country - different laws. People in Ireland complain that homeowners don't get enough protection from the law when it comes to defending their property. You can only use as much force as the intruder uses against you. In Texas you have the right to shoot someone on your property, be they armed or not.

aaaw yeah

Caoimhín · 03-05-2008 5:21pm

Ponster wrote: »

Different country - different laws. People in Ireland complain that homeowners don't get enough protection from the law when it comes to defending their property. You can only use as much force as the intruder uses against you. In Texas you have the right to shoot someone on your property, be they armed or not.

Does that include the postman, milkman? your wife maybe?

Lockstep · 03-05-2008 5:26pm

caoibhin wrote: »

your wife maybe?

She's coming right for us!

Sofaspud · 03-05-2008 5:32pm

EamonnKeane wrote: »

aaaw yeah

You made me choke on rice, you bastard!

Fizman · 03-05-2008 5:32pm

Verdict was correct IMO. Something tells me that if that happened in this country things would have panned out somewhat differently unfortunately!

Manic Moran · 03-05-2008 5:36pm

Kold wrote: »

It's completely legitimate to punish someone for killing someone who was not actually a rapist. He shot to kill and murdered an innocent(ish) man.

Where's the 'intent'? I seem to recall a recent case in Ireland where a law was considered unConstitutional because there was no possibility for a defense of 'it was an honest mistake.' You are correct to a point: Someone innocent died, and someone should have taken the rap. That someone has now been convicted of the death.

NTM

Lockstep · 03-05-2008 5:44pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

Where's the 'intent'? I seem to recall a recent case in Ireland where a law was considered unConstitutional because there was no possibility for a defense of 'it was an honest mistake.' You are correct to a point: Someone innocent died, and someone should have taken the rap. That someone has now been convicted of the death.

NTM

+1

smellslikeshoes · 03-05-2008 5:58pm

She deserved it, Although the man did use excessive force IMO. I know myself that if I came home to that I'd give him a dam good beating.

Sir Oxman · 03-05-2008 6:17pm

janeybabe wrote: »

Don't marry a crazy man? And if you insist on marrying a crazy man don't have an affair? And if you get caught having an affair by the crazy man run very fast?

You appear to be weird,
Did you read the Op?

Caoimhín · 03-05-2008 6:26pm

gambiaman wrote: »

You appear to be weird,
Did you read the Op?

appear?

Toto Wolfcastle · 03-05-2008 6:29pm

gambiaman wrote: »

You appear to be weird,
Did you read the Op?

I did indeed. And I just read it again. I would like to add don't marry a crazy woman.

The boyfriend was trying to run away. A swift kick in the balls would have sufficed. So I do think that he was a crazy man.

Also, being weird is not an insult to me, so thanks!

Steve.Pseudonym · 03-05-2008 6:33pm

Shooting your wife's rapist is okay with me. I say give him the congressional medal of honour.

Gummy Panda · 03-05-2008 6:33pm

I feel sorry for the husband. He tried to protect his wife and ended up killing an innocent man. He'll have to leave with that.

The guy that got shot, well he shouldn't be banging another man's wife, but that was a big price to pay for a few moments of fun.

The wife deserved the sentance. She reminds me of that case in the UK were a man was imprisoned for rape when he never even meet the woman. She claimed she was raped to the cops and gave a description. The description actually matched this guy. Rather then come clean when police detained the man, she pointed him out and said he was the one.

Gummy Panda · 03-05-2008 6:34pm

janeybabe wrote: »

I did indeed. And I just read it again. I would like to add don't marry a crazy woman.

The boyfriend was trying to run away. A swift kick in the balls would have sufficed. So I do think that he was a crazy man.

Also, being weird is not an insult to me, so thanks!

Janey, you so crazy

Sir Oxman · 03-05-2008 6:39pm

janeybabe wrote: »

I did indeed. And I just read it again. I would like to add don't marry a crazy woman.

The boyfriend was trying to run away. A swift kick in the balls would have sufficed. So I do think that he was a crazy man.

Also, being weird is not an insult to me, so thanks!

No worries!. Snap!

But, the man's wife convinced/did something to convince her hubby that the bloke legging it had just raped her.

IMO his reaction is not crazy. Shoot to kill (presuming guns are the law of the land and all that)

The wife should be locked up for life.

robby^5 · 03-05-2008 6:48pm

Kold wrote: »

It's completely legitimate to punish someone for killing someone who was not actually a rapist. He shot to kill and murdered an innocent(ish) man.

There's this precedent is the U.S where if you attack or kill someone because you feel yourself or others were in immediate danger then you have grounds to defend yourself by any means necessary. The husband was led to believe that his wife was in such danger and he reacted to protect her, that's why she is being done for manslaughter, she provoked the response from the husband. Of course its not some blanket excuse for killing someone, but being falsely led to believe your wife is being raped is probably more than enough of a defence in this case.

I don't blame the husband, if I walked in on my wife and she screamed "I'm being raped" with some guy on top of her and I had a gun, I wouldn't think twice about what to do.

Of course, the wives boyfriend would still be alive today if the man wasn't carrying a gun, says a lot about America I suppose.

Ponster · 03-05-2008 6:50pm

janeybabe wrote: »

I did indeed. And I just read it again. I would like to add don't marry a crazy woman.

The boyfriend was trying to run away. A swift kick in the balls would have sufficed. So I do think that he was a crazy man.

Also, being weird is not an insult to me, so thanks!

yaneybabe, can I ask if you are married?

I really doubt that you grasp the reaction that most men would feel in this case. Imagine that you had interrupted your mother having sex with a stranger. The guy runs off and your mother screams that she was being raped.

Would you just give the guy a "swift kick in the balls" ?

Dellboy2007 · 03-05-2008 6:52pm

I know this wasn't what happened here but could you imagine if a husband made that up..........?

It would be a damn good defense!! (In America of course!)

ronbyrne2005 · 03-05-2008 6:53pm

Hypothetically assume there really was a rape. Catching someone fleeing the scene of a rape is not enough justification to kill them. In such a case the killer would have gotten jail, the fact the man was innocent makes it worse. He could have caught him and shot him in leg or made him freeze till the legal enforcers of law ie:police arrived. Excessive force even if it was truly a rape. We can't have everyone taking the law into their own hands.

Steve.Pseudonym · 03-05-2008 6:55pm

Of course, the wives boyfriend would still be alive today if the man wasn't carrying a gun, says a lot about America I suppose.

Yes, but if he had been a rapist, which in the vast majority of cases like this he would have been (granted, that's still a small number), then he'd be dead. And frankly I'm okay with that. I also like the way the Texan courts handled the case. Guns are a double edged sword and all that.

Steve.Pseudonym · 03-05-2008 7:00pm

ronbyrne2005 wrote: »

Hypothetically assume there really was a rape. Catching someone fleeing the scene of a rape is not enough justification to kill them. In such a case the killer would have gotten jail, the fact the man was innocent makes it worse. He could have caught him and shot him in leg or made him freeze till the legal enforcers of law ie:police arrived. Excessive force even if it was truly a rape. We can't have everyone taking the law into their own hands.

Well, why not? Really, somebody is raping your wife/girlfriend/mother/brother or whoever, why shouldn't you be able to shoot them dead? Because it's not a just punishment? I disagree.

ronbyrne2005 · 03-05-2008 7:09pm

Steve.Pseudonym wrote: »

Well, why not? Really, somebody is raping your wife/girlfriend/mother/brother or whoever, why shouldn't you be able to shoot them dead? Because it's not a just punishment? I disagree.

You crash into a member of my family in your car, it may have been mostly an accident but I am desolate and blame you, I beat you up outside the resulting court case where you were found slightly at fault but cleared of any serious offence, and you fall and bang your head on ground and die from a haemorrage. Should I be punished?

Steve.Pseudonym · 03-05-2008 7:12pm

Not comparing like with like there buddy. An accident and a deliberate act of sexual violence are apples and oranges, so that's a non-argument.

Toto Wolfcastle · 03-05-2008 7:21pm

Ponster wrote: »

yaneybabe, can I ask if you are married?

I really doubt that you grasp the reaction that most men would feel in this case. Imagine that you had interrupted your mother having sex with a stranger. The guy runs off and your mother screams that she was being raped.

Would you just give the guy a "swift kick in the balls" ?

Yes, a swift kick in the balls would stop him and he could then be tried as a rapist and I wouldn't have killed anyone.

Boston · 03-05-2008 7:24pm

Well I think this shows exactly why you shouldn't be allowed just shoot someone even when you know they are guilty, because mistakes still happen.

ronbyrne2005 · 03-05-2008 7:24pm

Steve.Pseudonym wrote: »

Not comparing like with like there buddy. An accident and a deliberate act of sexual violence are apples and oranges, so that's a non-argument.

No it's about accepting/respecting law of the land. If I had a gun and walked in on a family member being raped and rapist was trying to escape I would fire a warning shot and hold them till police arrived or follow him untill I could alert authorities or get some help from other people to restrain him. If we adopted your logic vigilante lych mobs would roam the streets dishing out "justice". If we descend to shooting first and asking questions later we are undermining the justice system and lowering ourselves to the level of the criminal.

Lockstep · 03-05-2008 7:27pm

ronbyrne2005 wrote: »

Hypothetically assume there really was a rape. Catching someone fleeing the scene of a rape is not enough justification to kill them. In such a case the killer would have gotten jail, the fact the man was innocent makes it worse. He could have caught him and shot him in leg or made him freeze till the legal enforcers of law ie:police arrived. Excessive force even if it was truly a rape. We can't have everyone taking the law into their own hands.

Hindsight is a beautiful thing.

Sadly, the man would not be thinking so rationally.

FruitLover · 03-05-2008 7:27pm

robby^5 wrote: »

There's this precedent is the U.S where if you attack or kill someone because you feel yourself or others were in immediate danger then you have grounds to defend yourself by any means necessary. The husband was led to believe that his wife was in such danger and he reacted to protect her

No, he shot him as he was driving away. That's not defence, that's execution.

Manic Moran · 03-05-2008 7:28pm

ronbyrne2005 wrote: »

Catching someone fleeing the scene of a rape is not enough justification to kill them. In such a case the killer would have gotten jail, the fact the man was innocent makes it worse.

As mentioned, local laws will allow lethal force to prevent an escape in certain circumstances (mainly particularly greivous crimes, of which rape is one).

He could have caught him and shot him in leg or made him freeze till the legal enforcers of law ie:police arrived. Excessive force even if it was truly a rape. We can't have everyone taking the law into their own hands.

The guy was in a truck. Catching/shooting in the leg was not a viable option. Taking the law into their hands implies not following the law. It seems that he did stay within the law. See the Joe Horn case for another example.

NTM

Oopsie.. Wife convicted after husband shoots 'rapist.'

Comments