Posted on 06/24/2011 2:20:49 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
A northwest Houston man was clinging to life at the hospital Thursday, almost a week after authorities said his teenage girlfriend scalded him with boiling water.
Keira Jones, 17, was charged with aggravated assault after the June 18 attack on Ira Jones, 33, inside the home they shared in the 1000 block of E. 32nd Street.
According to the criminal complaint filed against her, the teen became angry because Ira Jones had been talking to another woman. She then threw a pot of boiling water at him..
[snip]
On what appears to be her Facebook page, Keira Jones traces the relationship with her much-older boyfriend.
On April 23, she posted being at home with her "husband," whom she identified as Ira Jones, Jr.
She continues along that vein for several days on Facebook, saying "He brings so much joy to me."
Her Facebook postings become darker within a few days. On May 2, Keira Jones wrote that she was "letting (him) go" and "can do better" without him.
In later expletive-filled Facebook postings, Keira Jones condemned people who "claim they love you but when you need them they (are) never there."
On June 19, the day after police said Keira Jones threw the boiling water, her Facebook status suddenly changed to "single."
On the day Harris County prosecutors filed the aggravated assault charge against her, Keira Jones posted her latest comment on Facebook.
"You shouldn't have hurt me the way you did and (you) wouldn't have (gotten) the reaction I gave you," she wrote.
Keira Jones is being held without bail at the Harris County Jail.
(Excerpt) Read more at chron.com ...
The part of the story that tells of her Facebook entries bothered me as much, if not more, than her assault (which no one should have suffered).
This obviously doesn't make sense as a universal claim, but it's a warning sign.
PS I cannot imagine how she thought she was going to get away with this, or how anyone else was going to want to even date her after she did that.
It’s as if a fantasy land mentality develops on social networking sites.
Yes.
17.
In this relationship since she was 15.
Inner City Democratic Party Community Organizers should be proud of the dependent class that they’ve “nurtured so well” and that keeps them in power.
...er, WAIT!
Didn’t have to read further once I read her name............Yup, the Amish at it again. Geeeeesh!
No justification for the scalding...but just a question: In Texas, is it legal for a 33 year old to be having sex (I’m assuming here, but they were living together) with a 17 year old?
Just reread, and answered my own question...same last name, I’m assuming married then.
I realize that a mug shot doesn’t bring out the best in you but like a person once said “The camera adds 10 pounds” and the response was “must have had quite a few people taking your picture that day”.
This loverly 17 yo lass is exactly what J Jackson talks about when he says he would cross the street....
If this is what the inner city is putting out as the ‘norm’ it goes a long way to explain why so many inner city ‘male yutes’ are on drugs or in jail.
Nothing says “class” like a tattooed boob.
Today’s pop-culture youth is not innocent any more.
The laws need to treat them as adults.
We need to treat them like a coiled rattlesnake.
More and more idiot girls are getting tattooed.
It’s a fad I will be glad to see run it’s course.
WoW! What a Babe!
You just gotta love that tattoo on her chest.
I didn’t even have to see that picture since the intro to this article said her/it’s/his name. I knew it was an Amish woman...........LoL!
“No justification for the scalding...but just a question: In Texas, is it legal for a 33 year old to be having sex (I’m assuming here, but they were living together) with a 17 year old?”
The answer to your question is: No.
Texas law, and Texans as well, do not approve of sex with beasts.
Realize the problem goes deeper than this story implies.
1. Sex was created by God for married people
2. Can’t really tell if these two were married, but they do have the same very common last name, so maybe they were, maybe they weren’t, but if married, adultery is one of the actions proscribed by the Ten Commandments. If they weren’t married, they shouldn’t have been in a sexual relationship because of the damage the sexual relationship does when the people aren’t married.
3. The guy “talking to” another woman probably means he had a problem staying zipped up
4. The damage such betrayal does to grown women is murderous, and to someone who is only 17, must feel horrible
5. Murders for adultery are commonplace
6. Adultery, while viewed as acceptable by our pagan progressive society, is not acceptable and is an egregious sin
7. Intent to kill would probably not be present in this scenario—doubtful the girl knew he would die, get burned yes, but doubtful she thought she was killing him
When will the execution be scheduled?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.