• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Hooker callously murders client, DA only charges her with manslaughter

Derec said:
Another case of double standard when it comes to female murderers. A prostitute injected a client with a lethal dose of heroin but even though her crime was captured on video she is only being charged with manslaughter rather than murder. The excuse that they "can't prove the intent to kill" is bogus as her actions clearly indicate she had the intent to kill as she deliberately injected him with heroin then finished her wine before closing the blinds without any attempt to render aid and she is suspected in a similar case elsewhere (establishing pattern of crime like that bitch Wuornos who in a rare fit of sanity by the criminal justice system got the death penalty but not before murdering seven men).

Alix Catherine Tichelman is joining the ranks of women like Mary Winkiler or Nikki Redmond that either get away with their murders of men outright or are given a slap on the wrist only. Remember, Mary Winkler shot her sleeping husband in the back, then cut the phone lines so he could not call for help as he did not immediately die and she got only 60 days. Nikki Redmond followed her boyfriend to another woman's house and shot him in the back but was acquitted because a woman following an unarmed man and shooting him in the back is apparently "self defense". :banghead:

Prostitute gave Google exec a fatal heroin dose, police say
Click to expand...

There very much is a double standard here.

You assume that the prosecution can prove intent, probably because she is a woman.

Further, you're doing the same old anecdotal thing all rightists indulge in. However, since the evidence does not support your contention that gangs of women roam the streets merrily slaughtering men willy-nilly for laughs or whatever, I can understand why you would try to use anecdotal evidence to support your case.

Just curious: why is it that you hate women so much? I mean, there are easier ways to avoid women (such as hanging out in gay bars) than spewing these half-baked arguments on a message board.
 
Derec said:
That's a pretty tall order and deliberately so constructed. The double standard is not limited to one county or even one state. They happen everywhere. Mary Winkler's case was in Tennessee, Nikki Redmond's in Georgia, this is in California.

In none of these states are there cases of men getting off with an acquittal or slap on the wrist under similar circumstances, which include guilt beyond any doubt.

is this just another example of you trotting out your misogynistic hobby horse?
Click to expand...
No I am just exposing misandry.
Click to expand...

The point is that men are often under charged or receive light sentences or acquittals when they murder women. And men. Your sense of injustice seems outraged only if the person who is accused in the death of another person is female and the victim male. This seems like bias on your part because many more women are killed by men than men are killed by women and you never ever seem to find even one case to be upset when men get away with murdering women.
 
Last edited:
il Palazzo said:
The move suggested they don't believe they can prove an intent to kill, even though authorities say Tichelman was caught on video injecting her client with heroin, stepping over him as he fell unconscious, finishing a glass of wine, and closing the boat's blinds before slipping away.
Click to expand...


By this statement alone I still don't see a proof of an intent to kill. She might just want to sedate him for whatever purpose. Even stepping on him on the way out doesn't prove that she thought he's dead. She could just be an asshole.

If it was my call I would rather consider:
1) Is the dosage found in his body overtly large? To the point of obviously fatal?
2) Does she have experience with heroin herself, or is she known to have any reason to know how much heroin is a lethal dose?
Click to expand...

According to the article, she stepped OVER him, not ON him. Big difference.
 
Anyhow, how common is it for a middle age man to start doing hard drug that late in life?
Cause it does seem that way - he got bunch of money in Google execing, bought a yacht and then decided to try drugs he never tried before, and killed himself by OD.
I am not an expert but I find it hard to believe established heroin addict can function as an exec.
 
barbos said:
Anyhow, how common is it for a middle age man to start doing hard drug that late in life?
Cause it does seem that way - he got bunch of money in Google execing, bought a yacht and then decided to try drugs he never tried before, and killed himself by OD.
I am not an expert but I find it hard to believe established heroin addict can function as an exec.
Click to expand...

He might not have been an established heroin addict. He might have been a noob who died because his body wasn't used to the stuff.

A lot of people do stupid things with their money, and for some the more money they have the stupider the things.
 
Does everyone who tries heroin necessarily and instantly become an addict? Maybe he tried it sporadically before, and only got back into it recently.
 
Jayjay said:
Does everyone who tries heroin necessarily and instantly become an addict? Maybe he tried it sporadically before, and only got back into it recently.
Click to expand...

Something to think about here:

A common cause of heroin ODs is being an addict but not having access to it for a while for some reason. A common cause of ODing is getting out of jail--they take the dose they're used to but since they haven't been using they're no longer habituated to it.
 
Underseer said:
I mean, there are easier ways to avoid women (such as hanging out in gay bars) than spewing these half-baked arguments on a message board.
Click to expand...
Why do you assume he's not posting from a gay bar?

I'm just wondering why 'callous' is in the subject line?
It's redundant. All the hookers i knew did everything callously, at least on the clock.
 
Derec said:
Always been conscious. But then again, I've never been murdered yet either, so I'm not sure how good a sample I make. :tonguea:

- - - Updated - - -

Ford said:
Funny thing about heroin is that an "overdose" for one person is just a nice mellow buzz for others.
Click to expand...
Really? I'd suspect there'd be a lot more accidental lethal overdoses if that were the case. Surely there is a LD50 or something (but then again, what's the st. dev.)
Click to expand...

As others have implied, you would have no idea how much the heroin you'd bought had been cut. It's not like taking a pharmaceutical with rigid control standards. A lot of ODs are from people being used to a a diluted form and then buying something purer. You take the same amount but it is multiples of your usual dose.

Derec, I have problems with the way you present facts initially. I read your OP and thought "That's terrible. How could the law let that happen?" Then find that you have cherry picked the facts and are outraged that a man died while a woman was within 15 meters. Past the first 2 lines in the article you quoted there were circumstances that made clear how the law let that happen.

Only someone who was expecting it would think to check if that was the complete relaxation of a recently hit up user, or death. According to the article he was "dying", that means still breathing. She's a prostitute, not a medical practitioner. She did what she was asked to do and left. Manslaughter was an appropriate charge simply because, prostitute, friend, total stranger, doctor, if you administer drugs to someone, even at their request, it is reasonable to be mindful of the effect that has. If she was a prostitute operating within the drug culture, and it seems that she was, then it's not surprising if this had happened before.

It seems that he used her prostitution services and then topped it off with a heroin high. Hypothetically, if they had shared the high and the google executive had lived and the prostitute had died, would you be just as outraged? Not a rhetorical question. I'm curious.

barbos said:
Anyhow, how common is it for a middle age man to start doing hard drug that late in life?
Cause it does seem that way - he got bunch of money in Google execing, bought a yacht and then decided to try drugs he never tried before, and killed himself by OD.
I am not an expert but I find it hard to believe established heroin addict can function as an exec.
Click to expand...

Heroin is the drug that least interferes with normal functioning. Especially once someone is habituated, they are fine until they don't get the dose needed to feel normal. Doctors and lawyers and other professionals with enough income to feed their habit can continue for years without detection.
 
spikepipsqueak said:
As others have implied, you would have no idea how much the heroin you'd bought had been cut. It's not like taking a pharmaceutical with rigid control standards. A lot of ODs are from people being used to a a diluted form and then buying something purer. You take the same amount but it is multiples of your usual dose.
Click to expand...
Actually, it doesn't have to be that much of a difference.
WHen i was a kid, the supply of heroin in Salt Lake City apparently skipped a dealer, skipping a round of dilution. The average purity of the stuff on the street was 9%. THen one week, people were shooting up with 12% pure heroin and dropping like flies. City officials asked everyone to take their stuff to the hospital for purity testing.

Hospital officials, being a bit more grounded in the real world, advised citizens to just cut their stash before using it.
The supply lines soon stabilized and everything was back to normal, including the rate of finding dead junkies off of State Street.

I'll always remember the numbers because i spent a while trying to figure out how much more sugar in a can of Coca Cola to increase it by 3%. My dad, a pharmacist, explained the math in great detail. Along with about five 'this one guy' anecdotes. By an amazing coincidence, everyone in his story that used drugs DIED.
 
Keith&Co. said:
spikepipsqueak said:
As others have implied, you would have no idea how much the heroin you'd bought had been cut. It's not like taking a pharmaceutical with rigid control standards. A lot of ODs are from people being used to a a diluted form and then buying something purer. You take the same amount but it is multiples of your usual dose.
Click to expand...
Actually, it doesn't have to be that much of a difference.
WHen i was a kid, the supply of heroin in Salt Lake City apparently skipped a dealer, skipping a round of dilution. The average purity of the stuff on the street was 9%. THen one week, people were shooting up with 12% pure heroin and dropping like flies. City officials asked everyone to take their stuff to the hospital for purity testing.
Click to expand...

I never realized the margin between a druggie's dose and an OD was that narrow. No wonder they tend to die!
 
spikepipsqueak said:
Derec said:
Always been conscious. But then again, I've never been murdered yet either, so I'm not sure how good a sample I make. :tonguea:

- - - Updated - - -


Really? I'd suspect there'd be a lot more accidental lethal overdoses if that were the case. Surely there is a LD50 or something (but then again, what's the st. dev.)
Click to expand...

As others have implied, you would have no idea how much the heroin you'd bought had been cut. It's not like taking a pharmaceutical with rigid control standards. A lot of ODs are from people being used to a a diluted form and then buying something purer. You take the same amount but it is multiples of your usual dose.

Derec, I have problems with the way you present facts initially. I read your OP and thought "That's terrible. How could the law let that happen?" Then find that you have cherry picked the facts and are outraged that a man died while a woman was within 15 meters. Past the first 2 lines in the article you quoted there were circumstances that made clear how the law let that happen.

Only someone who was expecting it would think to check if that was the complete relaxation of a recently hit up user, or death. According to the article he was "dying", that means still breathing. She's a prostitute, not a medical practitioner. She did what she was asked to do and left. Manslaughter was an appropriate charge simply because, prostitute, friend, total stranger, doctor, if you administer drugs to someone, even at their request, it is reasonable to be mindful of the effect that has. If she was a prostitute operating within the drug culture, and it seems that she was, then it's not surprising if this had happened before.

It seems that he used her prostitution services and then topped it off with a heroin high. Hypothetically, if they had shared the high and the google executive had lived and the prostitute had died, would you be just as outraged? Not a rhetorical question. I'm curious.

barbos said:
Anyhow, how common is it for a middle age man to start doing hard drug that late in life?
Cause it does seem that way - he got bunch of money in Google execing, bought a yacht and then decided to try drugs he never tried before, and killed himself by OD.
I am not an expert but I find it hard to believe established heroin addict can function as an exec.
Click to expand...

Heroin is the drug that least interferes with normal functioning. Especially once someone is habituated, they are fine until they don't get the dose needed to feel normal. Doctors and lawyers and other professionals with enough income to feed their habit can continue for years without detection.
Click to expand...
Are you saying I won't be able to detect a heroin addict observing behavior alone?
I thought they are a bit slow when they are on it.
Execs are opposite of that which implies cocaine.
 
barbos said:
Are you saying I won't be able to detect a heroin addict observing behavior alone?
I thought they are a bit slow when they are on it.
Execs are opposite of that which implies cocaine.
Click to expand...

High functioning opiate addicts exist. A lot of times it's because they are able to "moderate their excess" so that their use doesn't interfere with their lives. Sure if you walked in on them 20 minutes after they have injected then you can tell, but maybe after about an hour you wouldn't be able to tell if they had the tolerance of an addict. High functioning addicts are those people who are able to "quarantine" their abuse and separate it from the rest of their lives.

That being said, it is also possible and I'd guess likely that this guy wasn't an addict and merely a recreational user. Not every opiate user becomes an addict. Not every addict becomes a "junkie."
 
J842P,
looks like high functioning heroin addicts manage their addiction with .... heroin :)

Anyway, I am gonna file this google exec into the same file as that Toronto lawyer who was "testing" limits of that window glass.
 
My experience is with watching people who were "recreational users", stopping short of addiction by widely spacing their usage.

For a couple of minutes they weren't really aware, completely relaxed and away with the fairies. I never tried to arouse someone from that but I don't believe it would be possible. Then they would pull themselves together, and only their pupils would give them away. These were people holding down responsible positions but not going loaded to work, to my knowledge. But I have no difficulty believing the stories of addicted professionals managing their habit and maintaining their work.

I also have no difficulty believing that this woman hit up her client at his request, finished her wine, closed the curtains to protect him from prying eyes and left, believing him to be in the initial stupor or to have dropped off to sleep after sex and a hit of heroin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom