TexasCHLforum.com

HPD: Escort robbed wheelchair-bound U of H student, abandoned him outside motel
At least he is still alive to learn from his mistakes.

That is crazy! They have her name and photo. What on earth made her think she could get away with robbing this guy??? I can see where an anonomous person might feel like they can pull it off, but robbing someone who has your name and photo?? Pretty dumb.

I am not sure I believe his story about wanting to preach to her. It sounds like he was trying to buy some companionship and made that story up to cover himself. He could preach to someone for free. Why would he pay to do it???


I have watched a show that traps child predators into going and talking to Chris Mathews on camera. Then they arrest them...LOL. I never believe those people when they claim they were coming to save the under aged girl.

The victim, a 27-year-old student at the University of Houston-Clear Lake who suffers from multiple sclerosis and is confined to a wheelchair, told police that he wanted to "preach" to the suspect about living a better life

Yeah, sure, that's what he wanted to do, preach.

JJVP wrote:

The victim, a 27-year-old student at the University of Houston-Clear Lake who suffers from multiple sclerosis and is confined to a wheelchair, told police that he wanted to "preach" to the suspect about living a better life

Yeah, sure, that's what he wanted to do, preach.

What point are we trying to make? .... He deserved what he got?

Let's look at it this way.... A disabled man was attempting to make a business transaction with a person he met online. Whether you agree with the transaction or not, it was a transaction between two consenting adults. The BG (gal) kidnapped him, stole his money and possessions and threatened him with physical violence, picking up an accomplice (premeditated) along the way. Our victim in the wheelchair would have been well served having a CHL and carrying a gun.

RoyGBiv wrote:

JJVP wrote:

The victim, a 27-year-old student at the University of Houston-Clear Lake who suffers from multiple sclerosis and is confined to a wheelchair, told police that he wanted to "preach" to the suspect about living a better life

Yeah, sure, that's what he wanted to do, preach.

What point are we trying to make? .... He deserved what he got?

Let's look at it this way.... A disabled man was attempting to make a business transaction with a person he met online. Whether you agree with the transaction or not, it was a transaction between two consenting adults. The BG (gal) kidnapped him, stole his money and possessions and threatened him with physical violence, picking up an accomplice (premeditated) along the way. Our victim in the wheelchair would have been well served having a CHL and carrying a gun.

Not necessarily. TPC § 9.31 (a) (3) states you are justified in using self defense UNLESS the actor was engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.

Solicitation is defined in TPC § 43.02 and is a minimum of a Class B Misdemeanor.

So, he would not be justified using self defense in this case as he was engaged in criminal activity by the act of solicitation.

I don't feel he deserved what he got. I simply don't believe he was wanting to "preach" to her and thought it funny that he said it. That woman needs taken off the streets IMHO. He needs to be more careful who he hires to "preach" to.

Keith B wrote:
Not necessarily. TPC § 9.31 (a) (3) states you are justified in using self defense UNLESS the actor was engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used.

Solicitation is defined in TPC § 43.02 and is a minimum of a Class B Misdemeanor.

So, he would not be justified using self defense in this case as he was engaged in criminal activity by the act of solicitation.

Oh my... I did not think of that angle. He may have been in some trouble himself had he used a legal concealed weapon and defended himself.

Morally/ethically, no he doesn't deserve to be threatened with death and robbed because he called up an escort.

Tactically, he paid the price for violating at least part of the 4S rule: don't do Stupid Things in Stupid Places with Stupid People at Stupid Times.

Legally, as for not having a self-defense claim because he was engaged in a criminal act, I dunno; I seem to recall several stories where drug transactions/home invasions gone to violence result in no charges for the shooter; but he still goes to jail for his drug stash. I suspect that if it is at all difficult to prove that the defender was committing a lower level crime when he had to defend himself, the cops and prosecution just go with what's easy to prove, especially if the one getting shot did not die.

In this case, I don't know that prostitution could be proved -- I suspect simply paying a woman $100 to talk to you for an hour is not illegal. The gal and her accomplice are already facing enough trouble, they probably aren't going to add prostitution charges against themselves just so they can get the wheelchair guy can be charged. And unless the DA has a real agenda of stamping out prostitution at the expense of letting other crimes go, I doubt he'd offer a deal to the robbers to lessen their violent crime charges just so he could charge a wheel-chair bound guy who probably had trouble finding willing partners with being a john. That would not be a political winner, to say the least. So I think wheel chair guy would have come out OK if he had blasted his captors. Especially if they did not survive to testify.

ELB wrote:Morally/ethically, no he doesn't deserve to be threatened with death and robbed because he called up an escort.

Tactically, he paid the price for violating at least part of the 4S rule: don't do Stupid Things in Stupid Places with Stupid People at Stupid Times.

Legally, as for not having a self-defense claim because he was engaged in a criminal act, I dunno; I seem to recall several stories where drug transactions/home invasions gone to violence result in no charges for the shooter; but he still goes to jail for his drug stash. I suspect that if it is at all difficult to prove that the defender was committing a lower level crime when he had to defend himself, the cops and prosecution just go with what's easy to prove, especially if the one getting shot did not die.

In this case, I don't know that prostitution could be proved -- I suspect simply paying a woman $100 to talk to you for an hour is not illegal. The gal and her accomplice are already facing enough trouble, they probably aren't going to add prostitution charges against themselves just so they can get the wheelchair guy can be charged. And unless the DA has a real agenda of stamping out prostitution at the expense of letting other crimes go, I doubt he'd offer a deal to the robbers to lessen their violent crime charges just so he could charge a wheel-chair bound guy who probably had trouble finding willing partners with being a john. That would not be a political winner, to say the least. So I think wheel chair guy would have come out OK if he had blasted his captors. Especially if they did not survive to testify.

Well, possible, but all speculation.

You call an escort to, uh.. escort you. And, legally that would put him committing a crime. A lot of folks get cut some slack if something worse goes on, but bottom line, per the statutes he would not have the legal right to defend himself while comitting a crime.

The made 'em do it. Bof'um.

Oldgringo wrote:

The made 'em do it. Bof'um.

Flip Wilson???

Practically speaking..... If you're being kidnapped, you'd rather be tried than carried... No?

ELB wrote:In this case, I don't know that prostitution could be proved -- I suspect simply paying a woman $100 to talk to you for an hour is not illegal.

No? If you want to talk the talk, you can dial a 900-number for about that cost. Person to person contact implies something other than a chat line!

n5wd wrote:

ELB wrote:In this case, I don't know that prostitution could be proved -- I suspect simply paying a woman $100 to talk to you for an hour is not illegal.

No? If you want to talk the talk, you can dial a 900-number for about that cost. Person to person contact implies something other than a chat line!

Yeah, I'm not sure a Judge or Jury (or Wife) would buy that excuse. LOL

I don't think anyone is going to believe a story about wanting to hire an "escort" so you can "preach" to her. It is so absurd, it is funny. I won't go so far as to say he got what he deserved but I will say he got what he ask for. If any of us put ourselves in a situation of danger with nefarious individuals, we can't expect sympathy when we get "victimized". I put the word victimized in quotes because calling yourself a victim when you are committing a crime and get burnt is a very loose usage of the word. Claiming you were attempting to help someone when caught in the act of a sex crime is classic.

I can understand why they wrote the law to exclude criminal activity from a defense in the usage of deadly force. I could be a drug dealer who has not been caught yet. I have a CHL and can legally carry to protect my drugs???? LOL... it is kind of funny to think about.