750
submitted 3 months ago by Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 100 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

My mother was abused by her father. No one helped. Her own siblings, also abused, blamed her when she spoke out about it. She was then abused by my father. When the police came round after physical violence, they laughed at her.

I find myself not really expecting moral behaviour from humans as a group. That women must endure worse punishment for killing their abusers than their abusers would have received is unpleasant.

[-] Chocrates@lemmy.world 44 points 3 months ago

I'm just a flyby idiot on Lemmy, but I am blown away that she was charged. The one article I read didn't go into a ton of details on th actual shooting, but she was raped and trafficked and shot her abuser. Did the DA pursue it because she is black?

[-] L0rdMathias@sh.itjust.works 21 points 3 months ago

She traveled from Milwaukee to Kenosha of her own volition with intent to kill, shot him twice, burned his house down, and stole a car.

Going to someone's place uninvited with intent to kill that person is premeditated murder. Burning down a house is extremely reckless, others could've been easily caught up or injured in this rampage. Not to mention that the house fire likely destroyed a lot of potential evidence. Other victims might have more difficulty finding their own justice as a result, or worse if he had any accomplices their collaboration could be harder to prove.

Cool motive. Very understandable motive even. Still murder. Vigilante justice is no justice.

[-] Chocrates@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

That's what I was afraid of. Shooting him when she was about to be raped is different to a prosecutor than planning to kill her rapist and then making it happen.

[-] Microplasticbrain@lemm.ee 18 points 3 months ago

Im just some random dude on the internet, but if i was raped and sex trafficked I personally wouldn't feel safe until the rapist was dead. Our legal system is fucking garbage.

[-] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 3 months ago

...I personally wouldn't feel safe until the rapist was dead.

If humans had a justice system which prioritised protecting people from sex traffickers and rapists, that would be great. Put them in prison for a long time.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Yes, killing someone in self defense is different from going back later with intent to kill them. That’s always been true

[-] briercreek@lemmy.world -5 points 3 months ago

Do people think we have to let murderers go free because of their skin color? It sounds like 1950 again.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Every time I hear about something like this, I find myself thinking that climate change is a good thing. And then I fantasize about a head on gamma ray burst or a lovely coronal mass ejection stripping away the atmosphere.

Life was a mistake.

[-] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Humans aren't so great. But they also seem to be self-limiting, so it all evens out.

As you imply, humans have an overall negative impact on the human world that they create for themselves and each other. I don't emotionally identify as a human because of that. I just exist, and watch it all happen without blaming myself.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

Doing nothing in the face of great evil is half the problem with human beings.

[-] Microplasticbrain@lemm.ee 7 points 3 months ago

What was it mlk said about moderates?

[-] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 3 months ago

"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."

Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Letter from Birmingham Jail, by Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., 16 April 1963

[-] thejoker954@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

But if you're the only one doing something against that great evil you're a nutter.

And if what you are doing to fight that evil is against the societal norm - then at best you are a nutter, at worst you are a dangerous threat.

[-] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 months ago

Yes, the status quo can easily put pressure on people to not counter forces which harm humans. Meaning you end up with a human society that harms humans.

[-] AtomicTacoSauce@lemmy.world -2 points 3 months ago

My fantasy is that mutually-assured destruction scenario plays out. Give us some good fireworks before our eyeballs are roasted into particles. Humans suck, and it ain't gonna get better.

[-] briercreek@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

If a woman is the abuser does the man get to murder her?

[-] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 months ago

Men do murder their female partners at a much higher rate already.

Research shows around 10% of college aged males self-report as having sexually assaulted women. This has been replicated in multiple countries: https://jimhopper.com/topics/sexual-assault-and-the-brain/repeat-rape-by-college-men/

Men, on average, serve two to six years for killing their female partners: https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2019/jan/12/intimate-partner-violence-gender-gap-cyntoia-brown

 

So, yes, men get to murder women. They get to rape women. They self-report having done so as if it's not that big a deal. They get to enjoy shorter sentences than 11 years, on average. I hope this answers your question.

[-] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I've just read a comment from a woman who was held captive and tortured by an ex:

"Male friends who know what happened tell me I didn't fight back hard enough. “Just say no.” I did. “You should have left.” I tried. “You need to put up more of a fight. Don’t let these men walk all over you.” He beat me to the point I was bleeding internally and gave me permanent brain damage.

They will never get it. Nothing we can ever say will make them understand how it feels.

Compassion is not something that many humans are good at, I guess.

this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
750 points (98.3% liked)

News

23367 readers
2673 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS