>http://t.co/8c9aE8Jv1X
>
>Either the story is poorly written or im not understanding
>correctly. The story states that judging from the text
>messages it was clear that they had relations.

some transfolks are wonderfully skilled at the art of illusion. the illusion can be maintained even in intimate settings - even throughout sexual relations.

'relations' could mean Underwood (the deceased) performed oral sex on Champion. or that Underwood had receptive anal sex w/Champion. it could also mean that Underwood had receptive vaginal sex w/Champion after having had sexual reassignment surgery. if any of those occurred it's possible that Champion wouldn't know that Underwood was a transwoman.


Then towards
>the end the story states that the suspects dad claims that he
>was supposed to meet up with the victim for a sexual favor
>until he discovered that she was a man.

'meeting up for a sexual favor' could mean anything.

>Somebody lying. If it was clear from the text messages that
>they had, had relations before then how they " meet up " and
>all of a sudden he found out she was a man.

someone could've told Champion and when he confronted Underwood w/the info he didn't like what he heard from her and he snapped.

Sounds more like
>the guy was DL imo and didn't want his secret out.

not necessarily.

>Do you think transgender ppl should disclose that they've had
>gender reassignment surgery to prospective partners?

not necessarily. especially not early on.