A Milwaukee woman has been jailed for 11 years for killing the man that prosecutors said had sex trafficked her as a teenager.

The sentence, issued on Monday, ends a six-year legal battle for Chrystul Kizer, now 24, who had argued she should be immune from prosecution.

Kizer was charged with reckless homicide for shooting Randall Volar, 34, in 2018 when she was 17. She accepted a plea deal earlier this year to avoid a life sentence.

Volar had been filming his sexual abuse of Kizer for more than a year before he was killed.

Kizer said she met Volar when she was 16, and that the man sexually assaulted her while giving her cash and gifts. She said he also made money by selling her to other men for sex.

  • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    That’s your risk though. You let this person administer their own justice, why shouldn’t someone else?

    Where, exactly, is the line? How do you keep that slope from getting covered with oil and grease?

    • thejoker954@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      I mean you talk like it isn’t already a vigilante based system.

      Everything you are arguing is already happening. Except the vigilantes are state sanctioned.

      Cops pick and choose what laws to both follow AND enforce all the time. And the judges protect them.

      • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        By definition they aren’t vigilantes if they’re state-sanctioned. You can’t be both a vigilante and state sanctioned.

        Yes, cops pick and choose which laws to enforce (and I’m not addressing which laws cops follow, since it’s not directly relevant here). But cops are also supposed to be disinterested parties; the idea with having cops enforcing the law rather than a person that feels wronged is that cops ar supposed to be more even-handed, even if that’s not the way that it always–or even often–works out. Accepting vigilantism means that we throw out any semblance of impartiality, and make everything subjective.

        • thejoker954@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          If all you wanna do is argue definitions sure, but this ain’t rocket science. The end results are the same.

          • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            …Except that they aren’t even remotely the same.

            Vigilantism results in lynchings. That’s the end result.

            • thejoker954@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              So you think lynchings are a different than being shot 15 times in your home while complying.

              Gotcha. You wanna be a ‘rules lawyer’.