Authorities say her husband, Darrell Roberson, fired the shot that killed Mr. LaSalle, 32, outside the Robersons' Arlington home. Mr. Roberson had come home unexpectedly from a gambling trip to Dallas the night of Dec. 11, 2006, and found his wife and Mr. LaSalle together in Mr. LaSalle's truck.



He started shooting as a horrified Mrs. Roberson began saying she was raped. Arlington police charged Mr. Roberson with murder, and a detective testified that authorities never took out a warrant for Mrs. Roberson.

A bunch of people have passed on this story , about a woman who falsely told her husband she's been raped when he caught her with another man, prompting him to immediately shoot and kill the other man.* She was then convicted of manslaughter, while her husband was not charged at all.What I find particularly intriguing about that result is that it suggests men aren't able to control their emotions—he couldn't help but kill the guy when he thought he'd raped his wife!—which is a rather interesting, ahem, commentary on men. Simultaneously, it suggests that women should be able to control their emotions, and are to be punished when they don't—because, ultimately, what we have is a woman who (wrongly) told a lie in desperation, and a man who (wrongly) killed another man in anger, but it is her rash lie that is punished, not his rashly pulling the trigger. Four times.Of course the argument is that he never would have pulled that trigger without her lie, but why does that mean he should be exempt from punishment? If she had been telling the truth, and he had killed an actual rapist, it's still wrong.-----------------------* That's what we're clearly meant to think, anyway, although something smells fishy to me:That sounds to me more like he started shooting, and she started saying she was raped to try to save her own life—which would explain why, originally, he was charged and she was not. I get the distinct impression that this story is not totally what it seems.