Defense: Andrade did kill transgender teenager

[Hazumu]

Andrade's defense attorney, Annette Kundelius, followed saying Andrade did kill Zapata, but argued the murder was a crime of passion and doesn't rise to the level of first degree murder or a bias motivated crime.

"When [Andrade] learned Angie was in fact Justin and was a male, he immediately reacted to that," she said. "He had been deceived and he reacted."

[Janet_Girl]

He looks like someone who would kill without an provocation.  His reason is total crap.

Janet

[tekla]

If your best defense is "I did kill her, but it wasn't murder one..."  Well, it sucks to be him.

[sd]

He looks like someone who would kill without an provocation.  His reason is total crap.

His lawyer should have advised him about his appearance and demeanor.

I also agree with Tekla.

Oh well, "say hello to Bubba your cell mate, there will be no questions regarding what's between his legs".

[tekla]

There was a huge fight, which the defense won, to prohibit the introduction of evidence that he was a gang-banger.  Pretty worthless when he shows up in court looking like that, which just screams 'gang' all over it. Why his lawyer didn't force him to clean up, and dress up I can't imagine.

But, if they win the argument, that its not murder one, then they can't have hate crime stuff attached to it, as there was no premeditation, so that stuff does not come into play.  Still, second degree murder is still 20-life, not like its a lesser charge. 

[Lokaeign]

I'm just disgusted that people can still pull this "trans panic" garbage in this day and age.  How can they argue that he didn't kill out of hate AND claim that the discovery of Angie's natal gender provoked him to kill?

And that lawyer needs to shut her mouth until she learns not to talk like something out of the Dark Ages.  I know she's duty bound to defend her client to the best of her abilities, but that should not extend to justifying the murder of transsexual people.  Angie "was in fact a male"?  No, you ignorant dinosaur, she was "in fact" a woman--a young woman with her whole life ahead of her. 

[tekla]

I'm just disgusted that people can still pull this "trans panic" garbage in this day and age

Hell, you ought to be thrilled he's going to use that defense, after all, its never worked.  Might as well plead it out now.

[placeholdername]

He looks like someone who would kill without an provocation.  His reason is total crap.

Janet

I think you need to be careful about making judgements.  I've known plenty of guys who 'look like that', but would never kill anyone.  It's just as discriminatory to think someone a murderer because of how they look as it is to think someone a pervert because of how they dress.

[tekla]

I don't know, when I see guys that 'look like that' I tend to give them a wide berth.  If you're looking for some sympathy on the part of the jury - and as a defendant you are - I'd try not to look like that.

[Janet_Girl]

Exactly my point, Tekla.  It is his eyes that got me, I can almost see the hate I them.  And that is the scary part.

Janet

[Lokaeign]

I'm just disgusted that people can still pull this "trans panic" garbage in this day and age

Hell, you ought to be thrilled he's going to use that defense, after all, its never worked.  Might as well plead it out now.

It's not entirely clear that this defence has never worked in court--it may possibly have been a factor in (for example) getting some perps a second-degree murder conviction instead of first-degree.  That's hairsplitting on my part, though--you're broadly correct, no jury that I know of has failed to convict a murderer trying to use this defence, and all the legal analysis I've read argues that crimes against trans people are in no way to be regarded as crimes of passion.  So on some level, yeah, I am glad that was the best this land-shark could do because Andrade is now officially screwed.

Thing is, though, it's not just this particular perp trying to hide behind a panic defence--his lawyer, who surely ought to know better, is wheeling it out.  We're told how "betrayed" this man felt, how distressed he was to learn of his victim's trans status.  I fully expect the court to recognise this as pure Twinkie defence and throw the book at him anyways, but when you have lawyers coming out with this kind of thing it has the effect of legitimising violence against trans folk and creating further hostility and danger.  It makes crimes like this one look less serious, less worthy of police attention or public sympathy.

The lawyer is arguing that Andrade's crime was a "crime of passion."  This has a specific meaning.  A crime of passion is only recognised when the beliefs underpinning the strong emotion that prompted the act are "reasonable"--if the victim had in some way provoked the killer beyond endurance.  The usual examples are things like if the victim had previously murdered a loved one, or similar. So by advancing the crime of passion defence, the lawyer is in fact arguing that the killing rage evidenced by Andrade was "reasonable."  That simply being a trans woman who was intimate with a cis guy is on a par with having killed someone's mother.

I think this argument is pretty disgusting in its own right, and if it prevents the case from being treated as a hate crime... yeah, not such a great result.  There is some comfort in the knowledge that Andrade is definately going down, I guess.

[sd]

I fully expect the court to recognise this as pure Twinkie defence and throw the book at him anyways, but when you have lawyers coming out with this kind of thing it has the effect of legitimising violence against trans folk and creating further hostility and danger.  It makes crimes like this one look less serious, less worthy of police attention or public sympathy.

Well if they throw the book at him, maybe it will end this sort of thing. It's a foolish and weak defense.




They can toss out gangbanger evidence all they want, as soon as I saw the pic I knew, its pretty obvious. I knew a lot of gangbangers, I used to hang with them, yes some are nice, but you can't be a gangbanger without having a bad side to you. If you didn't have a bad side going in, you will soon enough. I'm glad he showed up and didn't hide who he is. Let him go to jail and earn his stripes, I just hope he's old and frail when he gets out. Regardless, he's not walking on this.

[heatherrose]

I think you need to be careful about making judgements.  I've known plenty of guys who 'look like that', but would never kill anyone.

I also have known some "rough looking sweethearts" and for a long time, I WAS one
but when this piece of excrement caved Angie's skull in with a fire extinguisher,
as his attorney readily admits that he did, he proved himself to be as EVIL as his
appearance portrays him to be. In doing so he has forfeited any claim
to the right to be judged by any other means.

He looks like someone who would kill without any provocation.

Janet's "judgment" is proper and correct because "He looks like someone
who would kill without any provocation" and he DID! Judgement is a survival tool
which we learn how and when to use with experience. It is tragic that
Angie and tens of thousands of women like her, who were attracted to the
bad boy image, never learned to use theirs.

[NicholeW.]

... Judgement is a survival tool
which we learn when and how to use with experience. It is tragic that
Angie and tens of thousands of women like her, who are attracted to the
bad boy image never learned to use theirs.

No truer words have been spoken on this topic. The idea of a bad boy may be inviting. But, so again may be the idea of a snake.

It's a matter of choosing the boa instead of the rattlesnake, of choosing the bad boy phase instead of the stuck on bad boy. Of course, there are times when the pretty, wealthy and O-so-middle-upper-class boys are deadly as well. A Fer de Lance is a lovely snake, but rather more deadly than the rattlesnake.

Nichole

[tekla]

Oh hogwash.  Lee Van Cleef had killer eyes.  He was pretty much typecast with them and made a pretty good living off of it.  On the other hand Ted Bundy has no such eyes.  They difference is that the second is a serial killer, and a mass murder, and LVC by all accounts was a gentle man, who never raised his voice on a soundstage, much less shoot anyone.

Go ahead play pick the killer.
http://www.moviemarket.co.uk/Photos/P202079_B68378.html
http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/usa/images-2/ted-bundy-in-court.jpg

[NicholeW.]

Oh hogwash.  Lee Van Cleef had killer eyes.  He was pretty much typecast with them and made a pretty good living off of it.  On the other hand Ted Bundy has no such eyes.  They difference is that the second is a serial killer, and a mass murder, and LVC by all accounts was a gentle man, who never raised his voice on a soundstage, much less shoot anyone.

Go ahead play pick the killer.
http://www.moviemarket.co.uk/Photos/P202079_B68378.html
http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/usa/images-2/ted-bundy-in-court.jpg

You talkin' to me, buster?

The point is that life ain't a movie, Kat, as you point out so well. Lee van Cleef played a bad guy. Ted Bundy was a sociopathic bad guy.

LvC was a boa, Bundy was at least a Fer de Lance.

Nichole

[tekla]

Bundy killed 30 for sure, more like 35, and some think the number goes higher than that, the youngest was 12.  He did that in a four year period, so that's the real deal.  By all accounts he was good looking, very smart, smooth and nice. 

LVC was not even a boa, I think he was an accountant before he began acting.  Not exactly mister sinister.

And, there is something about all the people who post things in here to the effect that 'you can't judge a book by the cover' or you should not judge people on their looks, who turn around and do just that.

Like I said, if I was his lawyer, I'd sure try a lot harder to make him look like choir boy, or as close as you could come, why go to all the trouble to get the gang stuff tossed when he sits there looking like a gang banger? 

And remember, "Public Defender" is an American Legal Term meaning, "You're so screwed."  I'd take a second degree, that's enough.

[heatherrose]

And, there is something about all the people who post things in here to the effect that 'you can't judge a book by the cover' or you should not judge people on their looks, who turn around and do just that.

Ya, I know what you mean. Don't you just hate it when people act like hypocrites?

I don't know, when I see guys that 'look like that' I tend to give them a wide berth...

[tekla]

I've lived a lot of my life in big city environments.  A lot of that, in some of the worst spaces in those cities.  Better safe than sorry as Nichole would say.  'Cause, when I see the guy with the shaved head, the prison tats and gang colors at 3am in a very marginal part of town, well, he could be a Rhodes Scholar, but I'm not going to play you bet your life on it.

And I'm sure as hell not going to date him either.  Bad choices lead to bad results.

You know, I used to like powder blue.  Its a good color on me.  But I don't dare wear it where I live or work.  Sends the wrong message.

And I'm sure you're not stopping your rig to give him a ride somewhere on I-35 at 3am either.

But I was only commenting on the 'killer eyes' crap.

[Michelle.]

What charges are contained in the indictment?

Can the jury even consider the "lessor" charge of 2nd degree murder?

Or is this a case of 1st degree murder, plus/minus hate crime, or he walks?

I would hate to see this guy walk because the jury is only able to consider murder one, and buys into this transphobia/heat of the moment defense.