CA's Ban on “Gay Panic” and “Transgender Panic” Is a Model for Other States

[skin]

Pete Kane, SF Weekly
September 30, 2014

After San Francisco Supervisor Dan White shot fellow Supervisor Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone in 1978, his attorneys put forth a novel argument. A former fitness fanatic, White claimed to be so depressed and so addled by a diet rich in junk food that he wasn't fully in charge of his faculties. The so-called "Twinkie Defense" succeeded in obtaining a reduced sentence for White, but generated sufficient outrage for it to be a one-trick pony.

Another, more cruelly homophobic strategy went on to contaminate the legal system, however: the gay panic defense.
Simply put, gay panic is the notion that acts of violence are partly justifiable when a person's all-consuming hatred for LGBT people causes them to go berserk or act with "diminished capacity." It's a heinous defense tactic that banks on a judge or jury's own homophobia, apportioning some blame onto victims in order to get a murder charge downgraded to manslaughter. Leaning on a "heat of passion" line of thinking deliberately turns a trial into something out of a pulp novel. Gay panic benefits from anti-LGBT bias, and adds to it as well, by dredging up ancient stereotypes of gays as sexual predators who can't be trusted not to curb their appetites.

And it's still in use in America — even in California. As the Advocate noted, the 2011 murder trial of Brandon McInerney (who was 14 years old when he killed his classmate, 15-year-old Larry King, who may or may not have been transgender) used King's flirtatious behavior as grounds for reducing the charges. It led to a mistrial when the jury couldn't reach a verdict, and McInerney's attorney succeeded in changing his plea to second-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter. Appalling as it sounds, "gay panic" works — insofar as its sole purpose is to muddy the waters.

But it's no longer a justifiable defense in Golden State courtrooms, since Assemblymember Susan Bonilla (an East Bay Democrat) has pushed a bill banning both gay panic and transgender panic as legal defenses through the legislature. Gov. Jerry Brown signed AB 2501 into law over the weekend, continuing to put the state at the forefront of LGBT rights.

More: http://www.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2014/09/30/california-bans-gay-panic-and-transgender-panic

[Jess42]

Pete Kane, SF Weekly
September 30, 2014

After San Francisco Supervisor Dan White shot fellow Supervisor Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone in 1978, his attorneys put forth a novel argument. A former fitness fanatic, White claimed to be so depressed and so addled by a diet rich in junk food that he wasn't fully in charge of his faculties. The so-called "Twinkie Defense" succeeded in obtaining a reduced sentence for White, but generated sufficient outrage for it to be a one-trick pony.

Another, more cruelly homophobic strategy went on to contaminate the legal system, however: the gay panic defense.
Simply put, gay panic is the notion that acts of violence are partly justifiable when a person's all-consuming hatred for LGBT people causes them to go berserk or act with "diminished capacity." It's a heinous defense tactic that banks on a judge or jury's own homophobia, apportioning some blame onto victims in order to get a murder charge downgraded to manslaughter. Leaning on a "heat of passion" line of thinking deliberately turns a trial into something out of a pulp novel. Gay panic benefits from anti-LGBT bias, and adds to it as well, by dredging up ancient stereotypes of gays as sexual predators who can't be trusted not to curb their appetites.

And it's still in use in America — even in California. As the Advocate noted, the 2011 murder trial of Brandon McInerney (who was 14 years old when he killed his classmate, 15-year-old Larry King, who may or may not have been transgender) used King's flirtatious behavior as grounds for reducing the charges. It led to a mistrial when the jury couldn't reach a verdict, and McInerney's attorney succeeded in changing his plea to second-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter. Appalling as it sounds, "gay panic" works — insofar as its sole purpose is to muddy the waters.

But it's no longer a justifiable defense in Golden State courtrooms, since Assemblymember Susan Bonilla (an East Bay Democrat) has pushed a bill banning both gay panic and transgender panic as legal defenses through the legislature. Gov. Jerry Brown signed AB 2501 into law over the weekend, continuing to put the state at the forefront of LGBT rights.

More: http://www.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2014/09/30/california-bans-gay-panic-and-transgender-panic

Panic? How can anyone panic when some poor gay or trans person comes around? What exactly is there to panic about? I don't panic when I encounter a group of outlaw bikers. I don't panic when I encounter someone that is racially different than myself. I don't panic when I encounter a bunch of young kids acting like gangsters. I don't panic when I run across a transphobe. If you kill someone for no reason other than your own life in danger or to save someone else's then you really need to sit in jail until you rot. Personally I believe the penalties for murder unless in cases of self defense or defending someone else should be a lot stiffer all around the board. So junk food caused someone to shoot two people. If that is the case, shouldn't the world be way less populated? Sounds to me like nothing more than a band aid on an arterial wound and politics. Sort of like the hate crime deal. The "Twinkie Defense"? This is really what they called it. Boy that is kind of demeaning and degrading. Maybe everyone should learn a little bit about everyone else and respect other's right to be who or whatever they want to be.

[Jill F]

My wife told me that the acid test to see if crap like
"Gay/trans panic" held water was to substitute "black" for the minority group in question.

That's how ridiculous it is.

[Sephirah]

I had to do a double-take when I read this.

Really? Using the fact that someone "freaked out" over someone who is gay or transgender as a defense to... well... anything? How is that even considered by any judge or jury with more than one brain cell? I'm happy that it's been banned but honestly, there shouldn't need to be a ban because it's a very, very weak defense in the first place.

Personal responsibility. Something that is being overlooked more and more in today's world. It's very sad.

[Vicky]

I'm happy that it's been banned but honestly, there shouldn't need to be a ban because it's a very, very weak defense in the first place.

As weak as it was, it still resulted in reduced penalties for violent and un-repentant criminals.  "The victim had it coming for being evil!!"  I have followed this defense and its faring with the courts, and other than hung juries at times where convictions came by way of plea bargains, no person was absolutely acquitted of all levels of violence here in California before, but weak as it was, it has kept the works muddied up for sure.

[Bombadil]

ugh

[Jess42]

1.As weak as it was, it still resulted in reduced penalties for violent and un-repentant criminals.  2."The victim had it coming for being evil!!"  I have followed this defense and its faring with the courts, and other than hung juries at times where convictions came by way of plea bargains, no person was absolutely acquitted of all levels of violence here in California before, but weak as it was, it has kept the works muddied up for sure.

1:Weak isn't even the word for it. I think I may even use the word ludicrous. I mean if someone scares you that much isn't it in you civic duty to try and get away before force, especially deadly force can be used? I seriously doubt that his life was in too much danger. He did get punished but not enough in my opinion. This is callously taking someone's life for no other reason than you don't agree with their lifestyle. There's a lot of lifestyles I don't agree with but I just choose not to live that type of lifestyle. I don't even belittle others for living a lifestyle that I don't agree with. Everyone is free to live how they want as long as they hurt no one else in the process.

2: As much as I hate to say it that is probably what it all boils down to. That is dangerous. There are plenty of evil out there and in this case the evil one was the murderer.

[Jill F]

So, I've been pondering some new defenses here...

Clown panic
Hipster panic
Douchebag panic
TSA panic
Mother-in-law panic
Fan-of-the-other-team panic
Panel van driver panic
Jill F panic

[Jess42]

So, I've been pondering some new defenses here...

Clown panic
Hipster panic
Douchebag panic
TSA panic
Mother-in-law panic
Fan-of-the-other-team panic
Panel van driver panic
Jill F panic

All accept for Jill F panic. OMFG, if you weren't here I' be sooooo bored. But Mother-in-law panic, I don't have one of those anymore. At the moment anyway. But it definitely won't be "her" daughter again. But "her" son. But my current boyfriend's mom loves me. He is bi and has had more boyfriends than girlfriends and I personally think she is happy to have another girl woman to talk to and shop with. Anyway we get along and even in her mid 70s can outdrink me. I'm even kind of ashamed to say this but is a wee bit wilder than me even.

[Shannon14]

One of the most frightening phrases you could ever hear..."trial by a jury of your peers".