A Texas jury acquitted a man for the murder of a woman he hired as an escort, after his lawyers claimed he was authorized to use deadly force because she refused sex.

Ezekiel Gilbert shot Lenora Ivie Frago in the neck on Christmas Eve, after she denied his requests for sex and wouldn’t return the $150 he had paid her, according to the San Antonio Express-News. Under Texas law, an individual is authorized to use deadly force to “retrieve stolen property at night,” and Gilbert’s lawyers cited that provision as justification for Gilbert’s action, reasoning that Frago had stolen $150 from him by taking his money without delivering sex. In a police interview played for jurors, Gilbert “never mentioned anything about theft,” a detective told the San Antonio Express-News. Frago, who was 21, was critically injured and died several months later.

While the shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Florida has generated notoriety for NRA-backed Stand Your Ground laws, which authorize the unfettered use of deadly force without a duty to retreat in defense of one’s person or home, Texas’ exceedingly broad law goes well beyond this, to allow deadly force in protection of any piece of “tangible” or “movable” property.

The Texas provision authorizes deadly force not only to “retrieve stolen property at night” but also during “criminal mischief in the nighttime” and even to prevent someone who is fleeing immediately after a theft during the night or a burglary or robbery, so long as the individual “reasonably” thinks the property cannot be protected by other means.

********************************************
So basically, if you want to kill someone in Texas, just wait until "after dark" or "at night"; shoot them and then plant a $20 bill on them and say you paid them for some/any service and they didn't perform.

I think its odd that so much time is spent making sure people are qualified to do what theyre doing, yet, there is no training for being a juror.
Jury nullification needs to be taught to every juror. These 12 people didnt understand they had an opportunity to not just Find on the facts of the case, but they also have the power to cut the legs out from under a law, even IF the law applies.
IF ( for instance) a guy is caught, red handed, with 5 pounds of pot. NO circumstantial evidence, on tape, he gets pulled over & thers 5 pounds layin on the seat next to him, on video.. that jury can find him not guilty.

And, this guy shot a hooker dead because she was stiffing him for $150.00,, well,, maybe $150.00 was the price of the escort service & anything else they worked out, well,, thats extra,, IDK the facts, BUT, IF in fact he had paid the escort fee AND paid her $150.00 for that "Little something extra" and she stiffed him for it he killed her?  then, read the law however you want, I dont care, I call that murder. & as a juror, I CAN call it murder, I do believe..