More Texas lulz
 

A Bexar County jury on Wednesday acquitted Ezekiel Gilbert of murder in the death of a 23-year-old Craigslist escort.

Gilbert, 30, embraced defense attorneys Bobby Barrera and Roy Barrera Sr. with tears in his eyes after the not guilty verdict was read aloud by state District Judge Mary Román.

Outside the courtroom, Gilbert thanked God, the Barrera family and the jury for being able to “see what wasn't the truth” and for the “second chance.”

Had he been convicted, he could have faced up to life in prison for the slaying of Lenora Ivie Frago who died about seven months after she was shot in the neck and paralyzed on Christmas Eve 2009. Gilbert admitted shooting Frago.

“I sincerely regret the loss of the life of Ms. Frago,” Gilbert said Wednesday. “I've been in a mental prison the past four years of my life. I have nightmares. If I see guns on TV where people are getting killed, I change the channel.”

The verdict came after almost 11 hours of deliberations that stretched over two days. The trial began May 17 but had a long hiatus after a juror unexpectedly had to leave town for a funeral.

During closing arguments Tuesday, Gilbert's defense team conceded the shooting did occur but said the intent wasn't to kill. Gilbert's actions were justified, they argued, because he was trying to retrieve stolen property: the $150 he paid Frago. It became theft when she refused to have sex with him or give the money back, they said.

Gilbert testified earlier Tuesday that he had found Frago's escort ad on Craigslist and believed sex was included in her $150 fee. But instead, Frago walked around his apartment and after about 20 minutes left, saying she had to give the money to her driver, he said.

That driver, the defense contended, was Frago's pimp and her partner in the theft scheme.

The Texas law that allows people to use deadly force to recover property during a nighttime theft was put in place for “law-abiding” citizens, prosecutors Matt Lovell and Jessica Schulze countered. It's not intended for someone trying to force another person into an illegal act such as prostitution, they argued.

mmondo@express-news.net

speshek@express-news.net


Read more: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/loc...#ixzz2VSk41Qaq

I don't know but this doesn't sound right. Maybe he was acquitted because of the deadly force law, but his lawyers were arguing both the deadly force law and a lack of intent. It wouldn't surprise me if the real issue was prosecutorial overreach. If they only charged him with murder (requires intent) but not manslaughter (doesn't require intent) and the jury wasn't convinced there was intent then according to the law he should have been acquitted and the deadly force law wouldn't come in to play at all. I'm just guessing but I think it is easily possible with as little as reporters today know about anything.

Alrighty then...

Sounds like Texas alright.

And, the funny thing, if he would have used a knife he would have gotten the chair.

Stupid jury verdicts happen every where.

It's the stupid law I have a problem with.

If cops aren't allowed to shoot fleeing thieves, then citizens shouldn't be allowed to either.

I'd rather have more freedom than cops.

BS, in Tx if a thief has something, and you're not going to be able to retrieve it, you can shoot them. Now it better be worth it, cuz even legally shooting people is not cheap.

fuk thieves, go get a job a earn your own chit or what if stolen item was some family heirloom that's irreplaceable ? Just cuz you hold a thiefs life in high regard didn't mean i have too.

cops don't have anything of their own to lose in that sit.

lol, so a regular citizen with no training, no authority, and possible emotional or racist motives is now the judge, jury & executioner

Oh well........I bet most people who praise this law only praise it in principle, and wouldn't have the stomach to actually carry it out if they had the chance, lolz

Correct. It's called choice. People that join the military havent shot at people but they seem to get the hang of it when that time comes.

I trust them about as much as a cop without enough training, way too much authority, possible emotional or racist motives, and the potential some power trip drove them to the job in the first place.

You are probably right about the people praising it, but as Rangerscott said it is called choice. I trust my ability to make that choice for myself based on what I know of myself compared to whatever arbitrary decision the government enforces on everyone "for our own good".

Choice to use deadly force against a deadly threat -----> Fine.

Choice to use deadly force to stop someone from running away with your stuff ------> Not fine IMO, since the cops themselves don't have that choice, unless Texas police code permits it, which I doubt unless maybe the burglar was armed and therefore presented a threat to the public.

Don't most people have home/renter's insurance anyway? What's worse, having to spend your $500 deductible, or having to spend thousands defending yourself in some kind of wrongful death lawsuit?

This is what it comes down to and why some people see this as approrpiate and others wonder how this can be legal in America. Its interesting to see how big a gap there is even within one country.

Its called pussification of america. There used to be a time when theives were actually punished and the "people" got to help with that.

Why stop when youll just get sent to jail for a couple months for petty crimes or not even that. Theres countries that cut off hands and then there is us, wrist slappers.

I AM THE LAW!

You don't have Felony Running there? Austin police shoot all the time and simply claim they were running and therefore suspicious.

Where I live I am 911.