Gay panic defense
|
|
- This article is about "gay panic" or "homosexual panic" as a legal defense against violent crimes. For information about the mental disorder, see homosexual panic.
Gay Panic Defense is a term used to describe a legal defense against certain crimes. Specifically, when a person claims to have committed a violent crime, attack, assault or murder against a person of the same sex or gender because they allege that the person made romantic or sexual propositions, it is called "gay panic". The defense is usually unsuccessful in winning acquittals, but it is often successful at reducing culpability and mitigating punishments.
The rationale behind the argument is that a non-homosexual person can become so offended or outraged by a sexual or romantic interest that is perceived to be homosexual that he or she is driven temporarily insane and commits an act that would not otherwise be of his or her character (such as murder). The defense is often criticized.
The defense is occasionally used in the United States of America, especially in Southern states, where disapproval of homosexuality is very common. It is believed by some that this defense's effectiveness is boosted by widespread social fear and disapproval of homosexuality. The gay panic defense is also occasionally used in cases of violence against transgender or transsexual persons, especially transwomen.
This defense was attempted in the famous case against the murderers of gay bashing victim Matthew Shepard. The two accused claimed that Shepard propositioned them, and they were enraged to the point of murdering him. However, the judge in the case, Barton Voigt, barred the strategy, saying, "The defense is, in effect, either a temporary insanity defense or a diminished capacity defense, such as irresistible impulse, which are not allowed in Wyoming, because they do not fit within the statutory insanity defense construct." In any case, the jury convicted Aaron James McKinney of second-degree rather than first-degree murder.
On May 9, 2005, jury selection began in the retrial of the closely watched Gwen Araujo homicide case in San Francisco, California. The defense had been asserted in the first trial, causing a jury deadlock. It is expected to be asserted again, and this time, "more vigorously", according to a consultant. (Source: KPIX-TV (CBS 5) web news article, May 9, 2005.)
External links
- Gay Panic Defense Ruling (http://www.courttv.com/archive/trials/mckinney/gay_panic_ruling_ctv.html) -- Ruling in the Matthew Shepard Case
- "They asked for it" (http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1589/is_2005_April_12/ai_n13606961): murderers of gay and transgender people across the country are still blaming the victims, claiming sexual advances can cause homicidal rage. Now prosecutors are joining together to get rid of the "gay panic" defense once and for all in The Advocate April 12, 2005 by Michael Lindenbergereo:Geja paniko