# In Texas you can shoot a prostitute for $150 **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 7, 2013, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365 "2013-06-07T08:44:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2013, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/141 "2013-06-08T17:34:33Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > He should have been charged and found guilty of something along the lines of grievous bodily harm and a bunch of other crimes. I do not think he should have been found guilty of murder because the shooting was only the first in the chain of events that lead to her death. A chain of events that he initiated, and that began with an attempt to commit a crime. In most places in the US, any death that happens as a result of illegal activity (or an attempt to commit an illegality) is murder. It doesn’t matter if 12 years go by between the crime and the death, if it can be directly attributed to the criminal event, it’s murder. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2013, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/142 "2013-06-08T18:40:46Z")
> [@straight\_man](#): > > … then does that mean Texas lumps all willful misrepresentation under simple theft? Which can justify killing, no less? I could see that getting messy! Again, killing is only allowed if it is “reasonable” to believe that the only way you can “prevent” the theft is by killing. So if a car dealer tells me that a car I just bought gets 50 mpg and it only gets 10, he has made a misrepresentation that may be construed as theft in Texas. But, even he told me that at night, I can’t drive back to the dealership and kill him. I have many other more reasonable alternatives to get my money back. If a guy breaks into my car at night, and I can’t make out his features, I probably don’t have another reasonable alternative to stop him. I can’t take him to court because I can’t identify him. This gnashing of teeth reminds me of the predictions when shall-issue CCW was passed: that blood would flow in the streets and people would fight duels over line jumping at the movies. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2013, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/143 "2013-06-08T18:44:34Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > IANAL but it sounds like the problem here was the type of charges brought by the prosecutor. > > So my question for the lawyers on this board is; couldn’t the prosecutor have given the jury a choice of both murder and manslaughter, and possibly other charges? Is this a matter of state laws? Does Texas not allow this, at least in some cases? Having read some more about this case, I think you’re right. It seems to me that the impact of the defense-of-property law on this case is being overstated. If the jury believed the defendant were shooting to disable the vehicle, rather than to kill the occupants, that alone means he’s not guilty of murder, irrespective of any property-defense claims, as the Texas statute [requires the intention to kill](http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.19.htm). Manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide being charged would mean that in order to acquit, the jury would have to believe that: (A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or (B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury. So, I agree that the charges were the issue, more so than the law. ---
**Author:** ![Tioga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/54ee81/32.png) [@Tioga](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tioga)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2013, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/144 "2013-06-08T18:44:44Z")
> [@Maastricht](#): > > Don’t forget that several hundred thousand dollar hospital bill society picked up. Also, the whore’s parents might beg to differ. Your use of “society” is vague. As for the parents, that why I used the word “net”. > [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > A chain of events that he initiated, and that began with an attempt to commit a crime. > > In most places in the US, any death that happens as a result of illegal activity (or an attempt to commit an illegality) is murder. > > It doesn’t matter if 12 years go by between the crime and the death, if it can be directly attributed to the criminal event, it’s murder. There was no criminal event. ---
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2013, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/145 "2013-06-08T18:53:11Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > In most places in the US, any death that happens as a result of illegal activity (or an attempt to commit an illegality) is murder. > > It doesn’t matter if 12 years go by between the crime and the death, if it can be directly attributed to the criminal event, it’s murder. Yes and no. What you’re probably referring to is the common law doctrine of “[Felony Murder](http://www.lexisnexis.com/lawschool/study/outlines/html/crim/crim24.htm)” which states “a person is guilty of murder if he kills another person during the commission or attempted commission of any felony.” Two issues with regard to applying that to this case. First, solicitation of a prostitute is not a felony in Texas, it’s a misdemeanor. The aggravated assault with a deadly weapon would have been a felony(which resulted in her death and did, in fact, upgrade the charge to murder), except the law provides a defense if you’re using the weapon to stop the theft of your property in the nighttime. So the felony murder rule doesn’t apply because the first crime he committed(solicitation of a prostitute)(not going to say alleged here, because, well, all parties agree he was trying to buy sex) wasn’t a felony, and the second crime he was charged with he was later acquitted of because it’s not a crime to use deadly force to protect your property from theft in Texas. Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2013, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/146 "2013-06-08T19:26:56Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > I understand, **Little Nemo** , but bear in mind that we’ve gone from talking about this specific case to talking about the law in general. And generally speaking we don’t write our laws based on one specific scenario. I don’t know all the facts of the case but I’m a bit surprised that this guy wasn’t convicted of something. For all I know the prosecution really dropped the ball on this one. It happens. But I think specific cases like this are relevant in a general discussion about these laws. I’m sort of in agreement with the general idea of these laws. But the problem is that many of them are poorly written and can be twisted to allow shootings in circumstances where it’s unreasonable. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2013, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/147 "2013-06-08T19:40:38Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > But Texas has theft of services laws. Do you think their “stand your ground” law includes that type of theft? How about embezzlement or receiving stolen property or paying for something with a bad check or theft of trade secrets or stealing cable (all of which are defined as theft in Texas)? Heck, the Texas Penal Code defines it as theft if you sell somebody a car without disclosing a lien. Are you saying somebody could shoot somebody that was committing one of these crimes? > > Isn’t it more likely that when the Texas “stand your ground” law listed theft as one of the justifications for using deadly force, it understood theft to mean common theft and not all of the other more exotic forms of theft? But this[sup]\*[/sup] is common theft. What are the elements of larceny at common law? [ul] [li]trespassory taking[/li][li]and carrying away[/li][li]of the personal property of another [/li][li]with the intent to permanently deprive the possessor of the property[/li][/ul] And dispossesing by fraud is a trespassory taking. So, yes – under these[sup]\*[/sup] facts, this isn’t any kind of exotic theft. It’s theft. [sup]\*[/sup] By “This” and “these” I refer to the hypothetical set of facts adduced in the OP, in which the woman arrives, fraudulently indicates she intends to have sex for the money, takes the money, and leaves without having the sex or returning the money. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2013, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/148 "2013-06-08T21:37:03Z")
> [@Mtgman](#): > > Yes and no. What you’re probably referring to is the common law doctrine of “[Felony Murder](http://www.lexisnexis.com/lawschool/study/outlines/html/crim/crim24.htm)” which states “a person is guilty of murder if he kills another person during the commission or attempted commission of any felony.” Two issues with regard to applying that to this case. First, solicitation of a prostitute is not a felony in Texas, it’s a misdemeanor. The aggravated assault with a deadly weapon would have been a felony(which resulted in her death and did, in fact, upgrade the charge to murder), except the law provides a defense if you’re using the weapon to stop the theft of your property in the nighttime. > > So the felony murder rule doesn’t apply because the first crime he committed(solicitation of a prostitute)(not going to say alleged here, because, well, all parties agree he was trying to buy sex) wasn’t a felony, and the second crime he was charged with he was later acquitted of because it’s not a crime to use deadly force to protect your property from theft in Texas. > > Enjoy, > Steven Agreed. And further, the “felony murder” doctrine is generally applicable only to an enumerated list of inherently dangerous felonies like rape, kidnapping, or armed robbery. If I am feloniously filling out a false income tax return at the kitchen table and my wife dies of a heart attack upon reading it, it’s not felony murder. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/149 "2013-06-09T02:31:11Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > A chain of events that he initiated, and that began with an attempt to commit a crime. > > In most places in the US, any death that happens as a result of illegal activity (or an attempt to commit an illegality) is murder. > > It doesn’t matter if 12 years go by between the crime and the death, if it can be directly attributed to the criminal event, it’s murder. The death wasn’t directly attributed to the criminal event, the woman died _because her family killed her_. Her family killed her because her respirator suffered a mechanical failure months after the shooting (it became disconnected) and caused brain damage. She was on the respirator because of the shooting, yes, but I do not think that euthanasia or suicide following an assault is justification to find someone guilty of murder. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/150 "2013-06-09T03:32:32Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But this[sup]\*[/sup] is common theft. > > What are the elements of larceny at common law? > > [ul] > [li]trespassory taking[/li][li]and carrying away[/li][li]of the personal property of another [/li][li]with the intent to permanently deprive the possessor of the property[/li][/ul] > > And dispossesing by fraud is a trespassory taking. > > So, yes – under these[sup]\*[/sup] facts, this isn’t any kind of exotic theft. It’s theft. > > [sup]\*[/sup] By “This” and “these” I refer to the hypothetical set of facts adduced in the OP, in which the woman arrives, fraudulently indicates she intends to have sex for the money, takes the money, and leaves without having the sex or returning the money. Does it matter that the initial agreement was for the performance of an illegal act? As such, there couldn’t be a legal contract made and therefore the man had no legal basis to expect anything in return when he gave the woman the money. He gave her money. She was not legally obligated to give him anything. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/151 "2013-06-09T03:36:55Z")
On a variation, suppose a panhandler is asking for money on the streets. I decide to give him a dollar. But after I hand him the bill, I see I accidentally gave him a fifty dollar bill. I ask for my money back and offer to give him the intended dollar instead. The panhandler refuses and says it’s his fifty now and he’s keeping it. Legally, what’s the situation here? Is he stealing my money if he doesn’t give it back when I tell him I gave it to him by mistake? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/152 "2013-06-09T03:42:16Z")
> [@Tioga](#): > > So a lying, thieving, whore gets shot and dies. > > Sounds like a net positive for society to me. Plenty of serial killers agree with you. This is classic “kill the whores” barbarism, despite all the legalistic handwaving to make it look like something else. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/153 "2013-06-09T04:35:22Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Does it matter that the initial agreement was for the performance of an illegal act? As such, there couldn’t be a legal contract made and therefore the man had no legal basis to expect anything in return when he gave the woman the money. He gave her money. She was not legally obligated to give him anything. I believe that you are conflating two different legal areas: contract law and criminal law. Yes, had this man sued the hooker in court for his money back under any theory, he would have been shut out. You cannot recover money for an illegal contract. It is void ab initio, or at the outset. Public policy says that we won’t even hear about contract disputes over drugs or prostitution. However, the criminal law of theft or larceny by trick applies to anything, even illegal things because the party wanting to assert the illegality has committed an illegal act him/herself. Think about it. Could you escape criminal liability by pretending to sell drugs and taking the money and running? ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/154 "2013-06-09T04:37:02Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > On a variation, suppose a panhandler is asking for money on the streets. I decide to give him a dollar. But after I hand him the bill, I see I accidentally gave him a fifty dollar bill. I ask for my money back and offer to give him the intended dollar instead. The panhandler refuses and says it’s his fifty now and he’s keeping it. > > Legally, what’s the situation here? Is he stealing my money if he doesn’t give it back when I tell him I gave it to him by mistake? Yes, he is. It is considered theft to not make a reasonable attempt to correct this sort of mistake. If he’d just found the $50 on the ground he doesn’t need to try to find the owner and verify they aren’t just a guy who wants fifty bucks, but merely holding something in your hands doesn’t make it yours. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/155 "2013-06-09T04:41:52Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > On a variation, suppose a panhandler is asking for money on the streets. I decide to give him a dollar. But after I hand him the bill, I see I accidentally gave him a fifty dollar bill. I ask for my money back and offer to give him the intended dollar instead. The panhandler refuses and says it’s his fifty now and he’s keeping it. > > Legally, what’s the situation here? Is he stealing my money if he doesn’t give it back when I tell him I gave it to him by mistake? It depends on the facts. Are you exiting a fancy restaurant wearing a tuxedo, carrying a cane, with a monopoly monocle over one eye? If so, it might very well be reasonable that the homeless man thought the $50 was a completed gift. Even in a normal situation, perhaps he thought you were having a generous moment. In any event, two elements are needed for a gift: 1) an intent to give the gift, and 2) delivery of the gift. You would have satisfied #2, but not #1. For the homeless man to be guilty of theft, you would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the homeless guy didn’t believe that you meant to give him a $50. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/156 "2013-06-09T05:18:58Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I believe that you are conflating two different legal areas: contract law and criminal law. Yes, had this man sued the hooker in court for his money back under any theory, he would have been shut out. You cannot recover money for an illegal contract. It is void ab initio, or at the outset. Public policy says that we won’t even hear about contract disputes over drugs or prostitution. That’s kind of my point. If the money was legally non-recoverable, then didn’t it legally belong to the woman? The man gave the woman money (with intent). She was not legally obligated to do anything in return because you can’t be legally obligated to perform an illegal act. So the money, from a legal point of view, was a gift. > [@jtgain](#): > > Think about it. Could you escape criminal liability by pretending to sell drugs and taking the money and running? Maybe. Any time you give a person money to pay them to commit a crime, you’re in a caveat emptor situation. True story. When I was working in prison, there was a prisoner who wrote a letter of complaint to the warden. He said that another prisoner had promised to give him some pajamas in exchange for a blowjob. The guy performed the blowjob but the other guy reneged on the agreement and wouldn’t give him the pajamas. He wanted us to enforce the deal by making the guy give him the pajamas. His request was denied. ---
**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/157 "2013-06-09T05:34:24Z")
Aaaahhh the old BJs for PJs scam. Get’s 'em every time. ---
**Author:** ![Namkcalb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c89c15/32.png) [@Namkcalb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Namkcalb)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 6:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/158 "2013-06-09T06:41:48Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > True story. When I was working in prison, there was a prisoner who wrote a letter of complaint to the warden. He said that another prisoner had promised to give him some pajamas in exchange for a blowjob. The guy performed the blowjob but the other guy reneged on the agreement and wouldn’t give him the pajamas. He wanted us to enforce the deal by making the guy give him the pajamas. > His request was denied. This is why prisoners need firearms (but only if they only shoot if it’s too dark to see their targets face) ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/159 "2013-06-09T07:55:14Z")
> [@Namkcalb](#): > > but only if they only shoot if it’s too dark to see their targets face Under the circumstances, seeing his target’s face when he was shooting wasn’t really a possibility. ---
**Author:** ![Namkcalb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c89c15/32.png) [@Namkcalb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Namkcalb)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2013, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365/160 "2013-06-09T12:11:51Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Under the circumstances, seeing his target’s face when he was shooting wasn’t really a possibility. I was referencing the fact that the Texan law only applies when dark enough not to see the criminal’s face. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/in-texas-you-can-shoot-a-prostitute-for-150/660365.md?page=9)