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
      27
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      10 months ago

      Do we really want vigilantism though? Because that’s where this leads.

        • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          Are you willing to universalize that though? Are you willing to allow all people that believe that they have been treated unjustly to take justice into their own hands?

            • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              10 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
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                10 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
                  1
                  ·
                  10 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
                    ·
                    10 months ago

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

      • ???@lemmy.worldBannedBanned from community
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        10 months ago

        The dowvotes on this one worry me.

        Yeah the police don’t work so your solution is to go be even worse police? At this point, no justice at all might be better rofl.