Woman who caused her lover's shooting death by falsely crying rape convicted
May 3rd, 2008 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & FamiliesMany of you have sent me articles about the Tracy Denise Roberson/Darrell Roberson case. According to the Associated Press, in that case "Darrell Roberson came home from a card game late one night to find his wife rolling around with another man in a pickup truck in the driveway. Caught in the act with her lover, Tracy Denise Roberson -- thinking quickly, if not clearly -- cried rape, authorities say. Her husband pulled a gun and killed the other man with a shot to the head."
Now Tracy Denise Roberson has been convicted of involuntary manslaughter and faces two to 20 years in prison. I covered this case in March 2007 after the grand jury indictment. In my blog post Stop the Presses--a Woman Is Held Accountable for Making a False Accusation I wrote:
"A Texas grand jury is actually holding a woman accountable for making a false accusation of rape--an accusation which led to the killing of the man she accused. The jury, correctly, saw that the woman’s husband acted reasonably--his wife screamed to him that she was being raped, so, like any good Texan, he shot the 'rapist.' But it turns out that the man wasn't a rapist at all--she was having an extramarital affair with him. Believe it or not, they dropped the charges against the husband and indicted the wife for manslaughter.
"According to the article, Mark Osler, a Baylor University law school professor and a former federal prosecutor, said the grand jurors evidently put themselves in the husband's place: 'I can see one of them saying, `I would have shot the guy, too. I was just protecting my wife.'
"To be fair, the woman acted quickly, and perhaps would not have made a similar claim if she had more time to think. Nevertheless, I don't have much sympathy for her."
Those words still seem fair enough to me. The AP article on the jury verdict is below.
Cry of Rape Lands Cheating Wife in Jail
Associated Press, 5/3/08
FORT WORTH, Texas (May 3) - A Texas woman who caused her lover's shooting death by falsely crying rape was convicted Friday of involuntary manslaughter.
Tracy Denise Roberson, 37, cried a bit when the verdict was announced. The punishment phase was set for Monday, and she faces two to 20 years in prison.
In late 2006, Darrell Roberson came home from a late-night card game to find his scantily clad wife with another man in a pickup truck in the driveway. Tracy Roberson was with her lover but cried rape, and her husband fired four shots into the truck as Devin LaSalle drove off, killing him.
Darrell Roberson initially was arrested, but a murder charge was later dropped and a grand jury indicted Tracy Roberson instead.
During her three-day trial, defense attorneys called no witnesses but blamed LaSalle's death on Darrell Roberson's jealousy and rage.
But prosecutors placed all the blame on Tracy Roberson, showing evidence of the affair with LaSalle, 32, and a text message in which she invited him to her house that evening.
"));
19 queries. 0.393 seconds.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Wee need comprehensive academic research into "womens violence by proxy", if we are to ever effectivelly address societal violence.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:52 pm
""According to the article, Mark Osler, a Baylor University law school professor and a former federal prosecutor, said the grand jurors evidently put themselves in the husband's place: 'I can see one of them saying, `I would have shot the guy, too. I was just protecting my wife.'"
In terms of masculism, I think this article is actually bitter-sweet. The good news is that a woman was held accountable for a false rape allegation. The bad news is that a man had to die. This is indeed a cultural reminder that it is certainly not only women that expect men to be disposable. It is also men who compete and walk over each other with a certain level of disdain for forming a real brotherhood that places cooperation above competition. Certainly Darrell Roberson could have just pulled the guy off her or something.
Men shooting or hurting other men is certainly an impediment to forming an alliance and brotherhood amongst men. It is too bad that men are socialized to be competitive while women are socialized to be cooperative. The sisterhood makes the brotherhood look like small potatoes.
MXY
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:03 pm
There was a recent media spectacle showing a man in cuffs, after stabbing a 17 year old boy in the boys high school.
Perfect example of the "media lace curtain" as they barelly mention the fact that the father stabbed the boy because his daughter made a false accussation of rape.
It's a perversion that our judiciaries are letting girls/women lie about something that gets men killed.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Edit, forgot to mention the article showing the man in cuffs, was on ABC news.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:09 pm
It is shocking to me that she wasnt believed.Im convinced that this scenario happens way more frequently then many people believe. This womens case I hope sheds some light on false rape allegations and I for one hope she enjoys the fruits of her crimes.
its about time!!
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:33 pm
Its good that she was convicted, and that she's looking down the barrel of two to twenty, but what are the chances she wont get the lower end of that range?
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:48 pm
My heart goes out to the husband. First, he has to deal with the fact that his wife was cheating on him. Second, he has to deal with the fact that he shot and killed and innocent man. Can you imagine? That could haunt him emotionally for the rest of his life.
I'm glad she was held accountable.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:54 pm
She needs to receive the maximum sentence. That's all I have to say about it. This was a terrible crime, and she needs to be punished for this crime.
May 4th, 2008 at 12:21 am
I saw a follow up news report on this tonight. The husaband, with a camera in his face, said that he would "trade places with his wife...". He begged the judge for leniency. He begged for probation. Is it condtioning that makes a man kill for a woman under false pretenses, possibly risking his own freedom, then turn around and want to protect the woman that almost threw him under the bus? Or something else?
Excerpted from "The Dallas Morning News":
But Sean Colston, the assistant Tarrant County district attorney who prosecuted the case, said the verdict was just.
"We always believed in our indictment," he said.
During closing arguments Thursday, Mr. Colston said Mrs. Roberson put Mr. LaSalle's life in peril to save herself.
"She will throw anyone under the bus," Mr. Colston said. "Imagine all the pain Tracy Roberson caused just because she wanted to do what Tracy Roberson wanted to do. She'll throw her husband under the bus. She'll throw [her daughter] under the bus. She'll throw Devin LaSalle under the bus.
"It's time to take responsibility," Mr. Colston continued. "It's time to let her know, 'You did cause Devin LaSalle's death.' "
And yet Darrell Robison would take her place in jail? Tell me once again, what is it that's wrong with men?
May 4th, 2008 at 1:02 am
I agree with Jorge, I feel a great deal of sympathy for the husband.
May 4th, 2008 at 1:23 am
Let this be a lesson - Don't mess with married women - it is potentially lethal. I am glad the husband was not charged.
May 4th, 2008 at 1:25 am
What a sad story. The woman deserves whatever she has coming to her from the courts. But I can't help wonder what the outcome would have been if the husband knew it was an adulterous affair rather than a rape.
May 4th, 2008 at 2:03 am
I must admit when I first learned that she was to be charged (as the truth was coming to light) I fully expected she would wrangle out of it, or at least get a 'Jury Null' out of the trial.
When I heard of the guilty verdict I very nearly choked on my coffee (fortunately I wasn't at the keyboard).
Hey, I'm man enough to admit it when I'm wrong.
I'm tempted to say she'll walk with a slap on the wrist (min sentence/probayion) over this... but I've been wrong twice now.
Lololol.
Throw her ass UNDER the jail, she pursued her own selfish hedonistic desires and got a man killed for it. I'm in for a carton of smokes to whichever inmate makes her life a living hell in the slam! Anyone want in on the action?
Seriously though, FemiPols take notice here: your days of reigning over the Kingdom of Man with impunity are coming to a close.
Tracey Roberson,
Tamara Anne Moonier.
Gemme Gregory.
Karyn Galila.
etc.
It's about (censored) time we stopped pandering to women in the criminal justice system. Now let's see a return to the fundamental premise of "innocent until proved guilty".
May 4th, 2008 at 7:42 am
my niece announced to all the world that she was pregnant, in love and about to get married. opps! the stud muffin didn't want to get married. seems she forgot to inform him that she quit the "pill". within 24 hrs, she accused him of rape. ain't love a peach? she had to back off as her position was untenable of course, but this happens more than we will ever know, i believe. i say, eat our own apples and don't make babies.
May 4th, 2008 at 8:19 am
There is accountability here, however, as far as the 'all important' paper record, a conviction of involuntary manslaughter is not a conviction for making false rape accusations. At least this sheds light on the harm caused by such lies. (For idiots - most people understand the harm, especially the false accusers)
Let us see if the female sentencing discount comes into affect.
May 4th, 2008 at 9:20 am
I hope anyone who's considering messing with another man's wife remembers what happened to this man. All too often, an enraged husband would have shot them both dead, then went to jail for it.
Taras
May 4th, 2008 at 9:47 am
MXY,
Your comment about male competition and female cooperation is so true about our current state of affairs.
What's great about this site in my opinion is the male sharing that takes place here. And that female posters are welcome too is important.
I recently read a very good book on human evolution by Franz DeWaal a noted primatologist.
When we were a low tech species 3 unique characteristics allowed humans to zoom past the other primates:
Male bonding ( like chimps)
Female bonding ( like bonobos)
Pair bonding ( caused males to stick around long enough to raise kids )
The combination of these three was unique to humans.
Today it seems that the female bonding is strong but the other 2 legs of our stool are weak. Somehow we need to rebalance and get all three going again for the massive challenges our species now faces.
May 4th, 2008 at 10:19 am
Like someone said"it is a bitter-sweet ending".I do feel for the husband.He thought he was protecting his wife from being raped but then found out about his wife dirty laundry.We will have to see how it goes with our wonderful court systems,to see really how much time she really does serve.I hope she serves it all but I'm sure it won't stop others from trying to cry rape.Life in todays world,some people dont know use common sense and see how much damage they can do to someone else and don't care.
May 4th, 2008 at 11:02 am
"To be fair, the woman acted quickly, and perhaps would not have made a similar claim if she had more time to think. Nevertheless, I don't have much sympathy for her."
Those words still seem fair enough to me.
==============
A lying, cheating skank, and here the "menz' are still bending over backwards to be "fair."
GAH!
Thank God for this drop of rain in the desert.
May 4th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Now that I'm breathing at a more normal rate, let me backtrack, and clarify:
It is good, and not surprising, that men are trying to be fair, even in the face of outrage. My caustic tone was overly much. Sorry to anyone I may have offended.
I wasn't being sarcastic. Every drop of rain in the desert IS precious -- and men's overall situation is arid indeed.
May 4th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
And here I was having such a bad day and I come home to read this story.
I feel tickled pink that this woman got a conviction.
I bet they give her probation though.
May 4th, 2008 at 11:58 pm
I can only wonder what else might have happened. Would she have stuck to her allegation if her husband hadn't shot him and called the cops instead? What would she have done if that man had instead killed her husband, or had a gun of his own? Would he have taken the time to explain, or would her husband just ended up dead?
I'm surprised she didn't go the "I was afraid of my husband" defense.
May 5th, 2008 at 3:07 am
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-roberson_29met.ART.State.Edition1.466d88c.html
Sounds like the husband had his gun out BEFORE she made the rape claim. It was certainly quite selfish for the woman to protect her life at the expense of her lover's, but the husband was intent on killing someone regardless. He should be locked up as well.
May 5th, 2008 at 8:30 am
What do you want to bet she gets the minimum.
Of all the media articles they show the husband who did the shooting. Why not show her, the one who got the
guy killed!
May 5th, 2008 at 10:06 am
Harq, CORRECTAMUNDO!!! I was typing that when I saw your comment. They both should have some account in this. The fact that the man gets away free is not doing any good. I don't need trigger happy maniacs getting off the hook that easily. She should be held accountable as well though.
May 5th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Harq--Yes, I saw this story linked on a feminist website and I think it raises an important point. Most of what I've read portrays it as the woman said she was being raped and the husband shot and killed the man he thought was raping or trying to rape his wife. If that's the case, I think the jury's verdict is correct.
The story you quote has it differently:
"Mr. Roberson drove home. When he reached his house in a South Arlington subdivision, he saw his wife and Mr. LaSalle kissing inside Mr. LaSalle's truck, police said.
"Mr. Roberson drew his gun and ordered his wife to get out of the truck...Mrs. Roberson...told her husband that she was being raped, officials said.
"Mr. LaSalle, 32, tried to drive away but was struck in the head by one of Mr. Roberson's bullets, officials said."
If this is the case, that certainly changes things. Apparently the jury didn't see it this way, though.
May 5th, 2008 at 11:04 am
Harq wrote: Sounds like the husband had his gun out BEFORE she made the rape claim. It was certainly quite selfish for the woman to protect her life at the expense of her lover's, but the husband was intent on killing someone regardless. He should be locked up as well.
How utterly preposterous! A 7-year old daughter is on the phone with dad, a law-abiding gun-owner. 7-year old daughter tells dad that mom is nowhere to be found in the house.
Let's stop there. What parent wouldn't go into a complete panic upon hearing that news?
Let's start again.
He comes home to find what appears to be his wife being accosted out in front of their home. Reacting instinctually, he draws his weapon and orders them out of the car where mom cries RAPE!!! The "suspect" tries to escape and is shot and killed.
Harq - until I see more details that assert to the contrary - you're WAY off the mark on this one. WAY off.
It was a tragic situation, without question, and an "innocent" man died. I'm not entirely surprised to see a "Feminist Dissident" finding that the unknowing male in this scenario should be punished, too.
And CJ... a trigger happy maniac? Based on what? The fact that he was trying to defend his family against an alleged attack? Please.
May 5th, 2008 at 11:32 am
And CJ... a trigger happy maniac? Based on what? The fact that he was trying to defend his family against an alleged attack? Please.
Basically. Part of being a family means that you protect each other. His wife said that guy was raping her so of course his instinct it to protect his family so he did. If it were a child crying wold you would naysayers be so quick to want to hold him accountable?
May 5th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
"If this is the case, that certainly changes things."
It does? How?
May 5th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Wow, Harq, .... well, I'd throw an insult, but I think it's just because you just don't get it.
See, this is TEXAS. And in TEXAS, when our wives (sons, daughters, friends) go missing, we go looking for her (them) instead of calling the police because you guys don't know how to do anything for yourselves. And in TEXAS, we carry a firearm so that in case something bad is happening to our wives (sons, daughters, friends), we have the ability to do something about it instead of relying again on the government to solve all our problems.
Might work a little differently in some Yancy-boy states where anyone carrying a gun does so with a bent wrist at arms length like they're afraid of it, but here in TEXAS we see it as what it is: A tool. A tool that can be used so we can resolve problems ourselves.
Self-sufficiency is a trademark of this State, apparently.
May 5th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
And I suppose those attitudes never lead to the accidental shooting of innocent people...like the very case in question for example. Long story short, YES even if it was a child crying, the end result was he irresponsibly shot an innocent man to death and that should be tantamount to manslaughter. It's manslaughter because he irresponsibly killed an innocent person. Deadly force shouldn't be used unless you see immediate danger to someone's life as in the person is lunging at you with a knife. In this case the person was driving AWAY! Shoot the tires shoot him in the leg when he tries to run but not DEADLY force! You're irresponsibly creating dangerous situations if your first reaction to every tense situation is to pull a firearm and start ordering people around (as it happened in this case).
May 5th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
"Sounds like the husband had his gun out BEFORE she made the rape claim. It was certainly quite selfish for the woman to protect her life at the expense of her lover's, but the husband was intent on killing someone regardless. "
Harq, you're way off with this, legally and morally. In the situation where you have an unknown trespasser who appears to be assaulting a family member, drawing a gun is clearly a defensive measure, with intent to just get control of the situation. The husband had no way of knowing at that point what the trespasser's intent was, or whetehr the trespasser was armed or not. As far as the guy being shot in the truck: well, first of all, my guess is that the husband ordered the trespasser to either lay on the ground or stand still, and clearly the trespasser refused to do so. Texas allows the castle defense, in which any trespasser who, upon being caught refuses to follow reasonable orders, is assumed to have ill intent, which allows the homeowner to shoot. Second, the homeowner is not a trained police officer and cannot be expected to make a bunch of split-second life-or-death decisions, one after the other in rapid succession. The trespasser, refusing to obey orders, jumps in the truck, starts it, slams it in gear, and guns the engine. So which gear is it in? Is he going to go forwards or reverse? How long do you want to wait to find out? If you wait, and your guess is wrong, you're dead. The husband had good reason at that point to perceive it as a him-or-me situation, and so his taking preventative action was entirely justified. The fact that he guessed wrong is not material.
May 5th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
I'm sure it has.
It's also lead to a reduced crime rate as criminals think twice about pulling some fiasco.
Like just about everything in life, it has a good and a bad side. Overall, I'd say the good outweighs the bad.
May 5th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Harq said:
"Sounds like the husband had his gun out BEFORE she made the rape claim. It was certainly quite selfish for the woman to protect her life at the expense of her lover's, but the husband was intent on killing someone regardless. He should be locked up as well."
I agree with Harq and CJ. Tracy and Darrell were both out of line.
Feminists may believe that rape is equal to or worse than murder, but I don't. Without belittling the seriousness of rape, nobody dies during rape. That is why I don't condone Darrell Roberson killing the so-called rapist, even if the rape was genuine.
Male sexual competition over women is certainly an impediment to forming a true brotherhood. It is one of the reasons men have a hard time cooperating. This fact that a man shot and killed his fellow man is NOT a victory for the men's movement.
MXY .
May 5th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Demonspawn: Kleck and Killias disagree with you on the net good outweighing the bad stating no significant correlation one way or the other between gun ownership and homicides (as one practical benchmark of violent crimes) in three separate studies (International Journal of Epidemiology 1998:27:216), (Canadian Journal of Criminology October 2001 Volume 43, No 4). For all the talk on these boards I read about how feminists never use facts I'd like to see some peer reviewed studies in journals that back up your claim.
Or we can debate the benefits and drawbacks of gun ownership and what the founders truly meant in the second ammendment on another day and focus on the topic at hand. It is not beneficial to society as a whole that she goes to prison for manslaughter (essentially reckless endangerment resulting in loss of life) for a false claim when he is the one that actually shot and killed an innocent man in what was a reckless decision. YES I DO expect him as a law abiding and responsible gun owner to make split second life or death decisions. If you truly value your right to own a firearm you must be responsible about it, otherwise you are criminally negligent if not recklessly endangering people. A gun is not a toy; it is a killing device and should be treated with more respect. Even in Texas. If you're going to be bringing a firearm into a situation you better damn well be sure you know what's going on. This man clearly didn't and that is negligent, reckless, what have you.
Making excuses for this guy doesn't benefit the men's right's movement or society as a whole.
May 5th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Cousin Dave wrote: Second, the homeowner is not a trained police officer and cannot be expected to make a bunch of split-second life-or-death decisions, one after the other in rapid succession.
Being a trained police officer makes no difference. I'm going to toss this out there because I did a research paper on this many moons ago... but police officers accidentally shoot people (the wrong suspect) at a rate that was either 3x or 11x greater than law-abiding citizens who discharge a firearm.
A law-abiding citizen is usually at the scene of a crime prior-to and/or just as it is happening. Police officers only come after a crime is underway... and usually... well underway.
May 5th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
MXY
"Male sexual competition over women is certainly an impediment to forming a true brotherhood. It is one of the reasons men have a hard time cooperating."
MCA, I've been in many situations where women/girls try to get men to fight each other for them.
But i think the current rape hysteria and subsequent lynching/killing of innocent men, is a result of 30 years of constant rape agitation propaganda. \
Also perverting and hiding the true percentages of false rape accussations.
There is so much rape propaganda that men are foaming at the mouth, looking for rapists.
May 5th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Kennesaw, Georgia. Nuff said. Unless, of course, you can name a city where a gun BAN happened and violent crime dropped to near zero. I'll keep waiting. You can talk about predictive studies all you want, but when you debate results the pro-gun crowd wins hands down.
Are you expecting omniscience? He saw his wife and another man in a truck. Not sure what was going on (nefarious or not) he took his firearm so he could protect his wife, if need be. His wife informed him she was being raped, he reacted accordingly based on the best information he had available at the time.
What more do you want? For him to magically know that his wife wasn't being raped?
Tell you what.... go get a grenade look-alike, run up to shake hands with the President, and then complain in the afterlife that the security guards weren't treating their firearms with proper respect. See how far that gets you.
Who's responsible? The person who acted appropriately on bad information, or the person who knowingly gave false information to the actor?
May 5th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
In another day, another age, killing this man would have been morally acceptable. If the shooter (husband) feared for his life or the life of his wife, and either were in imminent danger (like the 3000 lb truck in reverse at full accelleration towards the husband) then the shooting is justified. We may be happy that this woman is being punished for her part, but the taking of a life is not lightly justified today. I may not live in Texas, but I DO own a gun and I would not hesitate to use it to end the life of a person that wanted to hurt me or my loved ones. BUT, if I caught my wife outside of my house in the driveway in the cab after hearing from my daughter on the phone that she didn't know where Mom is to be found, I wouldn't assume that Mom was dragged outside and forced into the cab of a truck for the purpose of rape. I also wouldn't believe Mom's claim of rape. Law abiding gun owner or not, the husband shot and killed another man. ONLY if the husband was about to be run over by the truck is this justified. If not, he is wrong and should be punished for his crime (and his wife in an equal manner). We can't uphold the rights of men if we justify things in the same manner that Feminists do. We need to be more forceful in the way we uphold our rights, but again, ending someone's life over a cheating wife? Husband could walked away (unless there are circumstances we don't know about that made him fear for his life, or that of his wife's).
May 5th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
From Glenn's post above providing quotes from another news source:
"Mr. Roberson drove home. When he reached his house in a South Arlington subdivision, he saw his wife and Mr. LaSalle kissing inside Mr. LaSalle's truck, police said.
"Mr. Roberson drew his gun and ordered his wife to get out of the truck...Mrs. Roberson...told her husband that she was being raped, officials said.
"Mr. LaSalle, 32, tried to drive away but was struck in the head by one of Mr. Roberson's bullets, officials said."
In my opinion, the husband should have been prosecuted, found guilty and sent to jail.
May 5th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
He was prosecuted. Just FYI.
But of course, you're a better person than all 12 of the grand jury combined, aren't you?
May 5th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
If he had thought upon finding the wife and her lover that he was attacking her then that would make sense. However, it seems unlikely that he would mistake the sounds they were likely making for an attack.
May 5th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Demonspawn: "But of course, you're a better person than all 12 of the grand jury combined, aren't you?"
No sir, but I am entitled to my opinion.
May 5th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
DemonSpawn,
Your opinion is valid. I am not sure if I would have done or not done exactly what that husband did in the few seconds he had to make that decision. And you are right, he WAS prosecuted, and relieved of responsibility in the situation by a jury of his peers. All valid. Just as valid as a jury of 12 white men in rural Alabama in the late 1950's and early 1960's when a black man was accused of rape. Why did the husband come home from the late night card game? Because his young daughter called him in a panic because Mom was missing from the house. He rushes home. He sees a man kissing his wife in the cab of a truck. He is holding an unholstered, loaded gun. The panicked wife claims rape. This was the point at which he had the choice to make. Shoot? Not Shoot? I was put into a similar position my friend. I came home early from work and found my now ex-wife in bed with another man. I broke four of that man's bones and cracked his skull before the sheriff's deputies pulled me off of him and found a badge in his wallet. I went to jail that night for assault on a peace officer. I went in front of a judge. I told the judge I heard screams from the bedroom, saw a man on top of my wife (who never said a word about rape), and assumed that her life and body were in danger. I didn't have a gun, but I almost killed that man. I asked the judge what he would have done if he thought his wife was being raped. The judge dismissed the assault charges (with some admonishment to me for hurting the man more than was necessary). I am a free man. I had access to a gun though. I could have taken that gun and shot that un-armed man. I chose to use my fists.
From what I have read about this guy, and my own time spent living in Texas and understanding the values in different areas there, I might have shot at the guy too. Nevertheless, trial by jury or not, sounds like he made a poor decision, and a man was killed for sticking his rod where he shouldn't have. Juries aren't always right.
All of the terrible things that feminists and their ilk have done to us so far didn't create a situation in which that guy had to die DemonSpawn. Fight fire with fire, not matchsticks with cannons. There is a middle ground on which we can both stand up for ourselves. Macho Texas stuff isn't going to win us any battles. I both agree with you and disagree with you. We need to be louder, and tougher, and stand up for our rights, but using this guy as a good example will not win over the people we need to win over.
May 5th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
She's guilty of something obviously. But he's also guity of shooting, according to at least one story, a person who was fleeing the scene. It's pretty likely that he might have shot his wife too, or that she would at least think that from the way he handled the gun in anger.
I don't quite see how it's manslaughter, because she really didn't have control over whether someone was shot and/or killed. Maybe the Texas laws about when it's appropriate to use deadly force come into play?
May 5th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
It often gets quite annoying, and many respondants in this very thread of done it - to see people make references to things like ...using this guy to advance men's rights isn't doing us any favors.
I don't think I've seen one person "use this guy" as any such thing, but rather, demonstrate the tragedy that can result from rape hysteria, false claims of rape, and how men get set up (the backdoor man or the husband) in situations where there is violence by proxy.
Stop acting like anyone here is holding up the shooter as "an example to further men's rights." I didn't see a single respondant indicate any such thing.
May 5th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
"I don't think I've seen one person "use this guy" as any such thing, but rather, demonstrate the tragedy that can result from rape hysteria, false claims of rape, and how men get set up (the backdoor man or the husband) in situations where there is violence by proxy."
I certainly agree rape hysteria may be a large part of why this incident occurred. But I don't think it was the only reason. I think chivalry and the societal acceptance of male disposability have their unique place as well.
MXY
May 6th, 2008 at 10:17 am
Tell you what.... go get a grenade look-alike, run up to shake hands with the President, and then complain in the afterlife that the security guards weren't treating their firearms with proper respect. See how far that gets you.
Who's responsible? The person who acted appropriately on bad information, or the person who knowingly gave false information to the actor?
Reminds me of the the student that was arrested for having a hoax bomb at an airport and Aqua Teen Hunger Force ad campign. In both the instances the "bombers" were not intentionally misleading authorities but there were still plenty of people trying to hold them accountable.
This woman intentionally mislead her husband which lead to that man's death. But if people want him to be punished so badly then perhaps he can get the Mary Winkler discount. She was convicted of voluntary manslaughter and got three years (out of a maximum six, yes six) and surely this guy's case would be involutary manslaughter. So if you remove the female sentencing discount and add that fact that he killed a man instead of a woman he'll probably get about 10 years right?
May 6th, 2008 at 10:59 am
So many things wrong with this case, one the woman was wrong, and has caused enormous harm to many people as a result. The most interesting thing about her response is that it was quick eenough that she could not have thought about it for long, she didn't hesitate to make a false rape allegation to cover herself. Proof that women do think about this beforehand. The other problem I have is that the punishment for rape is not a bullet to the head with no jury or judge involved to find guilt, even if the woman was telling the truth and she was being raped this man had no more business pulling the trigger than a policeman or anyone else who might have stumbled upon them in the act. The fact this guy has a gun should have been enough to stop what was happening and then hold the guy and wait for law enforcement to sort it out properly. My guess is it is entirely possible that the dead man didn't know the woman was married, if she was willing to lie about the rape why not lie about everything else too? I think the dead man was entirely innocent and there is no way that the shooter gets off without punishment for taking matters into his own hands. Just my opinion. There are problems with allowing people to enforce their own summary judgements with a hand gun and the ony other witness is the dead man in many cases, that leaves the living to claim self defense or other lie to avoid justice for a murder.
May 6th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
And now what you've all been waiting for...(drum roll)...the feminist spin on this situation.
Here it is. Just go read it.
May 6th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
I have to admit once you read through the nonsense (and there's plenty) there are some worthwhile things to read (at least to me anyway).
May 7th, 2008 at 11:03 am
You know just don't bother reading it. That thread has descended into the usual Patriarchy Panic Button pushing and whining that a woman was treated unfairly complete with the usual childish namecalling from the moral high ground.
May 7th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
I am certain the wife will receive a suspended sentence or probation; she will not go to jail. It doesn't matter if it was rape or not. The man was protecting his property. Shooting a man stealing from is certainly reasonable and proper. Much better than calling the police.