189
submitted 2 weeks ago by girlfreddy@lemmy.ca to c/news@lemmy.world

A Texas man who sued his ex-wife’s friends for helping her obtain an abortion informed the court that the two sides reached a settlement, forgoing the need for a trial that would have tested his argument that their actions amounted to assisting in a wrongful death.

Attorneys for Marcus Silva and the three women he sued last year filed court papers this week stating they had reached an agreement. Two of the woman countersued Silva for invasion of privacy but have also dropped now those claims, according to court records.

“This case was about using the legal system to harass us for helping our friend, and scare others out of doing the same,” Carpenter said. “But the claims were dropped because they had nothing. We did nothing wrong, and we would do it all again.”

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] EndOfLine@lemmy.world 62 points 2 weeks ago

“He has engaged in disgracefully vicious harassment and intimidation of his ex-wife,” the opinion read. “I can imagine no legitimate excuse for Marcus’s behavior as reflected in this record, many of the details of which are not fit for reproduction in a judicial opinion.”

If only somebody could have predicted that mysogynist legislators weaponizing the legal system would enable abusers. /s

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 43 points 2 weeks ago

two sides reached a settlement

He's going to fuck himself and they're going to forget he exists?

[-] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago

Sounds perfectly equitable

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 24 points 2 weeks ago

Brittni and Marcus Silva divorced in February 2023, a few weeks before Silva filed his lawsuit. The defendants alleged in their countersuit that Silva was a “serial emotional abuser” in pursuit of revenge and that he illegally searched Brittni’s phone without her consent.

Sounds like a class act.

[-] cordlesslamp@lemmy.today 24 points 2 weeks ago

his ex-wife's

That's a relief, good for her.

[-] sygnius@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago

So he sued her friends, why didn't he try using the ex-wife that actually had the abortion? Sounds like a real piece of shit guy.

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 42 points 2 weeks ago

This is actually the way the law is written. Anyone who aids in any abortion, from the clinic performing it to the Uber driver taking her there -- is now subject to being sued by random tattletales. The women themselves are not subject to the same thing.

They did it this way on purpose. They didn't want the optics of the State going after these people so they specifically made it so that the State AG would not be involved in all. It would just be a bunch of private busybodies looking to get all into other people's business.

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 14 points 2 weeks ago

It's not just the optics, it makes it nearly impossible to have a judge remove the law at all since the state isn't a party to any of the suits. That's why this bullshit law was written to civilly penalize aiding abortions, not criminalize them.

[-] Nougat@fedia.io 13 points 2 weeks ago

What other situations exist where someone is obliged to keep another person inside their body?

[-] ravhall@discuss.online 6 points 2 weeks ago

You can’t rape your wife in a red state, har har.

[-] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

In Mississippi, a person can be convicted of sexual battery of a spouse when they are living together only if he engages in "forcible penetration against the victim's will".[40][citation needed] This excludes, among others, situations where the victim is "rendered incapable of knowing or controlling his or her conduct, or incapable of resisting an act due to the influence of any drug, narcotic, anesthetic, or other substance administered to that person without his or her consent".[41]

So just get them drunk I guess.

[-] ravhall@discuss.online 2 points 2 weeks ago

Not even drunk, just spike the punch and rape away! M. I. S. S. I. S. S. I. P. P. IIIIIII!

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

None, of course. And yet at the same time, you need to grant express written permission to have your organs harvested after you die.

Women in Texas have more rights over their body when they're dead than when they're alive.

this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2024
189 points (98.5% liked)

News

23282 readers
5337 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