Gay panic defense

Last updated

The gay panic defense or homosexual advance defence is a strategy of legal defense, which refers to a situation in which a heterosexual individual charged with a violent crime against a homosexual (or bisexual) individual claims they lost control and reacted violently because of an unwanted sexual advance that was made upon them. [1] [2] [3] [4] A defendant will use available legal defenses against assault and murder, with the aim of seeking an acquittal, a mitigated sentence, or a conviction of a lesser offense. A defendant may allege to have found the same-sex sexual advances so offensive or frightening that they were provoked into reacting, were acting in self-defense, were of diminished capacity, or were temporarily insane, and that this circumstance is exculpatory or mitigating. [5]

Contents

The trans panic defense is a closely related legal strategy applied in cases of assault or murder of a transgender individual with whom the assailant(s) had engaged in or was close to engaging in sexual relations with and claim to have been unaware that the victim was transgender, [2] [3] [6] producing in the attacker an alleged trans panic reaction, often a manifestation of transphobia. [7] [8] In most cases, the violence or murder is perpetrated by a heterosexual man to an androphilic trans woman. [7] [8]

Broadly, the defenses may be called the "gay and trans panic defense" or the "LGBTQ+ panic defense". [5] [6] [9]

History

The gay panic defense grew out of a combination of legal defenses from the mid-nineteenth century and a mental disorder described in the early twentieth, seeking to apply the legal framework of the temporary insanity defense, provocation defense, or self-defense, often by using the mental condition of "homosexual panic disorder".

Homosexual panic disorder

Edward J. Kempf (1886–1971), a psychiatrist, [10] coined the term "homosexual panic" in 1920 and identified it as a condition of "panic due to the pressure of uncontrollable perverse sexual cravings", [11] and classified it as an acute pernicious dissociative disorder, meaning that it involved a disruption in typical perception and memory functions.[ citation needed ] Kempf identified the condition during and after World War I at St. Elizabeths Hospital in Washington, D.C. [12]

The disorder was briefly included in DSM-1 as a supplementary term in Appendix C [13] but did not appear in any subsequent editions of DSM and thus is not considered a diagnosable condition by the American Psychiatric Association. [14]

Unlike the legal defense created later and named after it, the onset of the condition was not attributed to unwanted homosexual advances. Rather, Kempf stated that it was caused by the individual's own "aroused homosexual cravings". [15]

Homosexual panic as a mental health disorder is distinct from the homosexual panic defense (HPD) (also known as "gay panic defense") within the legal system. Whereas homosexual panic disorder was at one point considered a diagnosable medical condition, the HPD implies only a temporary loss of self-control. [16]

Types of defenses

The gay panic defense strategy usually falls into three categories of defenses: the provocation defense, self defense (including imperfect self defense) and insanity based defenses (including temporary insanity, irresistible impulse, and diminished responsibility). [17] [18] The gay panic defense is not a stand-alone defense, but rather a legal tactic used by the defense which seeks to obtain an acquittal, a mitigated sentence, or a conviction of a lesser offense. [18]

Jurisdictions

Australia

In Australia, it is known as the "homosexual advance defence" (HAD). [19] [20] Of the status of the HAD in Australia, Kent Blore wrote in 2012: [21]

Although the homosexual advance defence cannot be found anywhere in legislation, its entrenchment in case law gives it the force of law. ... Several Australian states and territories have either abolished the umbrella defence of provocation entirely or excluded non-violent homosexual advances from its ambit. Of those that have abolished provocation entirely, Tasmania was the first to do so in 2003.

In Australia, as of 2023, all Australian states have either abolished the provocation defense altogether (Tasmania in 2003, Victoria in 2005, Western Australia in 2008 and South Australia in 2020), or have restricted its application. Queensland restricted the defense of provocation in 2011, and further restricted it in 2017 (with a clause to allow it in 'exceptional circumstances' to be determined by a magistrate). [22] In a differing approach, New South Wales, the ACT and Northern Territory have implemented changes to stipulate that non-violent sexual advances (of any kind, including homosexual) are not a valid defense. [21] In New South Wales, the law on provocation was amended to provide that the provocative conduct of the deceased must also have constituted a serious indictable offense. [23]

South Australia was the first Australian jurisdiction to legalize consensual homosexual acts in 1975; however, as of April 2017 it was the only Australian jurisdiction not to have repealed or overhauled the gay panic defense. [24] In 2015, the South Australian state government was awaiting [25] [26] the report from the South Australian Law Reform Institute and the outcome of the appeal to the High Court from the Court of Criminal Appeal of South Australia. In 2011, Andrew Negre was killed by Michael Lindsay bashing and stabbing him. Lindsay's principal defense was that he stabbed Negre in the chest and abdomen but Negre's death was the result of someone else slitting Negre's throat. The secondary defense was that Lindsay's action in stabbing Negre was because he had lost self-control after Negre made sexual advances towards him and offered to pay Lindsay for sex. The jury convicted Lindsay of murder and he was sentenced to life imprisonment with a 23-year non-parole period. The Court of Criminal Appeal upheld the conviction, finding that the directions to the jury on the gay panic defense were flawed, but that every reasonable jury would have found that an ordinary person would not have lost self-control and acted in the way Lindsay did. [27] The High Court held that a properly instructed jury might have found that an offer of money for sex made by a Caucasian man to an Aboriginal man in the latter's home and in the presence of his wife and family may have had a pungency that an unwelcome sexual advance made by one man toward another in other circumstances would not have. [28] [29] Lindsay was re-tried and was again convicted of murder. The Court of Criminal Appeal upheld the conviction, [30] and an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court was dismissed. [31] In April 2017, the South Australian Law Reform Institute recommended that the law of provocation be reformed to remove discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and/or gender, but that the removal of a non-violent sexual advance as a partial defence to murder be deferred until stage 2 of the report was produced. [24] Finally, in 2020, South Australia abolished the defense of provocation altogether. [32]

In 2023, one Hector Enrique Valencia Valencia in New South Wales was found not guilty of murder after discovering a sex worker he'd engaged with was a trans woman and proceeding to strangle her with a telephone cord. The presiding justice stated that it could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Valencia had intended to seriously harm her. He was instead found guilty of manslaughter. [33] [34] [35]

New Zealand

In 2003, a gay interior designer and former television host, David McNee, was killed [36] by a part-time sex worker, Phillip Layton Edwards. Edwards said at his trial that he told McNee he was not gay, but would masturbate in front of him on a "no-touch" basis for money. The defense successfully argued that Edwards, who had 56 previous convictions and had been on parole for 11 days, was provoked into beating McNee after he violated their "no touching" agreement. Edwards was jailed for nine years for manslaughter. [37] [38]

In July 2009, Ferdinand Ambach, 32, a Hungarian tourist, was convicted of killing Ronald Brown, 69, by hitting him with a banjo and shoving the instrument's neck down Brown's throat. Ambach was initially charged with murder, but the charge was downgraded to manslaughter after Ambach's lawyer successfully invoked the gay panic defense. [39] [40]

On November 26, 2009, the New Zealand Parliament voted to abolish Section 169 of the Crimes Act 1961, removing the provocation defense from New Zealand law, although it was argued by some that this change was more a result of the failed provocation defense in the Sophie Elliott murder trial by her ex-boyfriend. [41]

Philippines

Lance Cpl. Joseph Scott Pemberton, a U.S. Marine from Massachusetts, was convicted of homicide (but not of murder) in the killing of Jennifer Laude in a motel room in Olongapo in the Philippines in 2014. Police said that Pemberton became enraged after discovering that Laude was transgender. After Pemberton served six years of a ten-year sentence, President Rodrigo Duterte gave him an absolute pardon. Sen. Imee Marcos said the pardon would help the Philippines maintain "very deep and very cordial" relations with the US. [42]

United Kingdom

Guidance given to counsel by the Crown Prosecution Service of England and Wales states: "The fact that the victim made a sexual advance on the defendant does not, of itself, automatically provide the defendant with a defence of self-defence for the actions that they then take." In the UK, it has been known for decades as the "Portsmouth defence" [43] [44] [45] or the "guardsman's defence". [46] The latter term was used in a 1980 episode of Rumpole of the Bailey .

United States

Federal laws

In 2018, Senator Edward Markey (D-MA) and Representative Joseph Kennedy III (D-MA) introduced S.3188 [47] and H.R.6358, [48] respectively, which would ban the gay and trans panic defense at the national level. Both bills died in committee. [49] [50]

In June 2019, the bill was reintroduced in both houses of Congress as the Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2019 (S.1721 and H.R.3133). [51] [52] The bills would prohibit a federal criminal defendant from asserting, as a defense, that the nonviolent sexual advance of an individual or a perception or belief of the gender, gender identity, or expression, or sexual orientation of an individual excuses or justifies conduct or mitigates the severity of an offense. [49] [50] Similarly to S.3188, after being sent to committee, the bill died at the end of 2020, and was re-introduced (as S.1137) in April 2021. [53] [54] It was reintroduced in January 2023. [55]

State laws

States that have bans (blue) or are considering bans (pink) on the gay and trans panic defense, as of 2023 Gay and trans panic defense bans in the United States.svg
States that have bans (blue) or are considering bans (pink) on the gay and trans panic defense, as of 2023

In 2006, the California State Legislature amended the Penal Code to include jury instructions to ignore bias, sympathy, prejudice, or public opinion in making their decision, and a directive was made to educate district attorneys' offices about panic strategies and how to prevent bias from affecting trial outcomes. [56] [57] The American Bar Association (ABA) unanimously passed a resolution in 2013 urging governments to follow California's lead in prescribing explicit juror instructions to ignore bias and to educate prosecutors about panic defenses. [58] [59]

Following the ABA's resolution in 2013, the LGBT Bar is continuing to work with concerned lawmakers at the state level to help ban the use of this tactic in courtrooms across the country. [59]

Bans and consideration of bans for gay and trans panic defense
StateConsideredBannedBillRef
California—2014AB2501 [60]
Illinois—2017SB1761 [61]
Rhode Island—2018H7066aa/S3014 [62]
Connecticut—2019SB-0058 [63]
Hawaii—2019HB711 [64]
Maine—2019LD1632 [65]
Nevada—2019SB97 [66]
New York2014—S7048 [67]
2015A5467/S499 [68] [69]
2017A5001/S50 [70] [71]
—2019A2707/S3293 [72] [73]
New Jersey2015—A4083 [74]
2016A429 [75]
20182020A1796/S2609 [76] [77]
Washington, D.C.2017—B22-0102 [78]
—2020B23-0409 [79]
Georgia2018—HB931 [80]
Wisconsin2019—AB436 [81]
Washington20192020HB1687 [82]
Pennsylvania2020—HB2333 [83]
Colorado—2020SB20-221 [84]
Texas2020—HB73 [85] [86]
Virginia—2021HB2132 [87]
Maryland—2021HB231 [88]
Oregon—2021HB3020/SB704 [89] [90]
Vermont—2021HB128 [91]
Florida2021—SB718 [92]
Iowa2021—HF310 [93]
New Mexico2021—SB213 [94]
Minnesota2021—SF360 [95]
Massachusetts2021—HD2275/SD1183 [96] [97]
Nebraska2021—LB321 [98]
Arkansas2022—LB321
North Carolina2022—LB321
New Hampshire2021—HB238 [99]
—2023HB315 [100] [101]
Delaware2023HB142 [102] [103]
Michigan2023HB4718 [104]

On September 27, 2014, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill No. 2501, making California the first state in the US to ban the gay and trans panic defense. [105] AB 2501 states that discovery of, knowledge about, or potential disclosure of the victim's actual or perceived gender, gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation does not, by itself, constitute sufficient provocation to justify a lesser charge of voluntary manslaughter. [60]

In August 2017, Bruce Rauner, Governor of Illinois, signed SB1761, [61] banning the gay and trans panic defenses in that state. [106]

In June 2018, H7066aa and S3014, [62] bills to prohibit the gay and trans panic defense passed the Rhode Island Assembly with overwhelming margins: The House voted 68–2 [107] and the Senate voice voted 27–0. [108] The Governor of Rhode Island signed the bill into law a month later in July 2018. The law went into effect immediately. [109]

In 2019, the New York State Legislature once again considered banning the gay panic defense. [110] For the 2019–2020 session, the bills considered were S3293 and A2707; prior versions of the bill have died in committee (S7048, 2013–14 session; A5467/S499, 2015–16 session; A5001/S50, 2017–18 session). [73] On June 30, 2019, the day of the NYC Pride March, Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the ban into law, effective immediately. [111]

In April 2019, both houses of the Hawaii State Legislature passed bills to prohibit the gay and trans panic defense (HB711 and SB2). A conference committee was set up to reconcile the two versions of the bill; the reconciled bill passed both houses on April 26, 2019, and was signed into law two months later, on June 26, 2019, by the Governor David Ige. It went into effect immediately. [64] [112] [113]

In May 2019, the Nevada Legislature passed SB97 to prohibit the gay and trans panic defense used within Nevada state courts and tribunals. On May 14, 2019, Governor Steve Sisolak signed SB97 into law. The law went into effect on October 1, 2019. [66] [114]

In June 2019, the Connecticut General Assembly passed SB-0058 unanimously to prohibit the trans and gay panic defense. The bill was signed into law by Governor Ned Lamont. [63] The law went into effect on October 1, 2019, as per the rules governed under the Constitution of Connecticut. [115] [116]

Also in June 2019, the Maine Legislature passed a bill (House vote 132–1 and Senate vote 35–0), which was signed by Governor Janet Mills on June 21, 2019, to ban the "gay and trans panic defense" effective immediately. [117] [65]

New Jersey passed a bill without a single vote in opposition to ban the gay and trans panic defense; it was signed into law in January 2020. [118]

In February 2020, the Washington State Legislature passed a bill (House vote 90–5 with 3 excused and Senate vote 46–3) to abolish the gay panic defense. The bill was signed into law in March 2020, by the Governor of Washington State Jay Inslee. Washington state became the tenth US state to ban the gay panic defense when the law went into effect in June 2020. [119] [120] [121]

In July 2020, Colorado became the 11th US state to abolish the gay panic defense. The final vote was 63–1–1 in the House and 35–0 in the Senate. [122]

In December 2020, the Council of the District of Columbia unanimously voted on a bill to ban the use of the "gay and trans panic defense". Mayor Muriel Bowser said she would sign the measure. The bill will then go to Capitol Hill for a 30 legislative day review by Congress, required by the District of Columbia Home Rule Act. [123]

As of January 2021, similar bills have been introduced in several other states. [49] [50] [ which? ]

Use of the gay panic defense

The gay panic defense is invoked as an affirmative defense, but only to strengthen a more "traditional criminal law defense such as insanity, diminished capacity, provocation, or self-defense" and is not meant to provide justification of the crime on its own. [124] While using the gay panic defense to explain insanity has typically not been successful in winning a complete acquittal, diminished capacity, provocation, and self-defense have all been used successfully to reduce charges and sentences. [124]

Historically, in US courts, use of the gay panic defense has not typically resulted in the acquittal of the defendant; instead, the defendant was usually found guilty, but on lesser charges, or judges and juries may have cited homosexual solicitation as a mitigating factor, resulting in reduced culpability and sentences. [125]

In 1995, the tabloid talk show The Jenny Jones Show filmed an episode titled "Revealing Same Sex Secret Crush". Scott Amedure, a 32-year-old gay man, publicly revealed on the program that he was a secret admirer of Jonathan Schmitz, a 24-year old straight man. Three days after the episode was filmed, Schmitz confronted and killed Amedure. [126] Schmitz was tried for the first-degree murder of Scott Amedure, however, he was convicted on the lesser offense of second-degree murder after asserting the gay panic defense. [127]

Uses of the trans panic defense

  • A trans panic defense was used in 2004–2005 in California by the three defendants in the Gwen Araujo homicide case, who claimed that they were enraged by the discovery that Araujo, a transgender teenager with whom they had engaged in sex, had a penis. Following their initial suspicions about her birth-assigned sex, Araujo was "subjected to forced genital exposure in the bathroom, after which it was announced that she was 'really a man'". [128] The defendants claimed that Araujo's failure to disclose her birth-assigned sex and anatomy was tantamount to deception, and that the subsequent revelation of her birth-assigned sex "had provoked the violent response to what Thorman represented as a sexual violation 'so deep it's almost primal'". [128] The first trial resulted in a jury deadlock; in the second, defendants Mike Magidson and Jose Merél were convicted of second-degree murder, while the jury again deadlocked in the case of Jason Cazares. Cazares later entered a plea of no contest to charges of voluntary manslaughter. The jury did not return the requested hate crime additions to the convictions for the defendants. [129]
  • Angie Zapata was beaten to death by Allen Andrade in July 2008. After Andrade learned that Zapata had a penis, she smiled at him and said "I'm all woman"; his defense attorney stated the smile "was a highly provoking act, and it would cause someone to have an aggressive reaction" when arguing to have the charge against him dropped to second-degree murder. Judge Marcelo Kopcow rejected that argument, [130] and Andrade was sentenced to a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole after he was convicted by a jury of first-degree murder in 2009 after two hours of deliberation. The conviction included a hate crime endorsement, believed to be the first instance of a hate crime application when the victim was transgender. [131]
  • Islan Nettles was beaten to death in Harlem just after midnight on August 17, 2013. [132] The killer, James Dixon, was not indicted until March 2015, despite turning himself in three days after the attack and confessing that he had flown into "a blind fury" when he realized that Nettles was a transgender woman. [133] Dixon pleaded not guilty to first-degree manslaughter at his indictment. [134] Dixon was not charged with murder, which would have required proof of intent, nor was he charged with a hate crime. [134] During his confession, Dixon said that his friends had mocked him for flirting with Nettles, not realizing that she was transgender. Furthermore, in an incident a few days prior to the beating, his friends had teased him after he flirted with two transgender women while he was doing pull-ups on a scaffolding at 138th Street and Eighth Avenue. [133] Dixon pleaded guilty and received a sentence of 12 years' imprisonment, a sentence that Nettles' mother felt was too lenient. [135]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Murder of Gwen Araujo</span> 2002 murder of trans girl in California

Gwen Amber Rose Araujo was an American teenager who was murdered in Newark, California at the age of 17. She was murdered by four men, two of whom she had been sexually intimate with, who beat and strangled her after discovering that she was transgender. Two of the defendants were convicted of second-degree murder, but not the requested hate-crime enhancements to the charges. The other two defendants pleaded guilty or no-contest to voluntary manslaughter. In at least one of the trials, a "trans panic defense"—an extension of the gay panic defense—was employed.

In law, provocation is when a person is considered to have committed a criminal act partly because of a preceding set of events that might cause a reasonable individual to lose self control. This makes them less morally culpable than if the act was premeditated (pre-planned) and done out of pure malice. It "affects the quality of the actor's state of mind as an indicator of moral blameworthiness."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in the United States</span>

In the United States, public opinion and jurisprudence on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights have developed significantly since the late 1980s.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in Australia</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights in Australia rank among the highest in the world; having significantly advanced over the latter half of the 20th century and early 21st century. Opinion polls and the Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey indicate widespread popular support for same-sex marriage within the nation. A 2013 Pew Research poll found that 79% of Australians agreed that homosexuality should be accepted by society, making it the fifth-most supportive country surveyed in the world. With its long history of LGBT activism and annual Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras festival, Sydney has been named one of the most gay-friendly cities in the world.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in New Hampshire</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in the U.S. state of New Hampshire enjoy the same rights as non-LGBT people, with most advances in LGBT rights occurring in the state within the past two decades. Same-sex sexual activity is legal in New Hampshire, and the state began offering same-sex couples the option of forming a civil union on January 1, 2008. Civil unions offered most of the same protections as marriages with respect to state law, but not the federal benefits of marriage. Same-sex marriage in New Hampshire has been legally allowed since January 1, 2010, and one year later New Hampshire's civil unions expired, with all such unions converted to marriages. New Hampshire law has also protected against discrimination based on sexual orientation since 1998 and gender identity since 2018. Additionally, a conversion therapy ban on minors became effective in the state in January 2019. In effect since January 1, 2024, the archaic common-law "gay panic defence" was formally abolished; by legislation implemented within August 2023.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in Alabama</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals in the U.S. state of Alabama have federal protections, but still face legal challenges and discrimination on the state level that is not experienced by non-LGBT residents. LGBT rights in Alabama—a Republican Party stronghold located in both the Deep South and greater Bible Belt—are severely limited in comparison to other states. As one of the most socially conservative states in the U.S., Alabama is one of the only two states along with neighboring Mississippi where opposition to same-sex marriage outnumbers support.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in Queensland</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights in Queensland have advanced significantly from the late 20th century onwards, in line with progress on LGBT rights in Australia nationally. Private consensual sex between men has been legal in the state since 1991, with lesbian sexual acts never criminalised. The age of consent was equalised to 16 years for all sexual acts in 2016. Sexuality and gender identity are protected attributes under both state and federal anti-discrimination laws. Same-sex couples may marry under Australian law, enter into a civil partnership under state law or live together in an unregistered de facto relationship. Same-sex couples may become parents through adoption, foster care, altruistic surrogacy and, for lesbian couples, IVF. In 2020, Queensland became the first jurisdiction within Australia to pass a law banning conversion therapy, with a maximum penalty of 18 months imprisonment and fines. State anti-discrimination protections for sexuality and gender identity were introduced in 2002 and in 2017 the gay panic defence was abolished from the criminal law. Transgender and intersex Queenslanders are able to update their government records and birth certificate, with the formal repeal of both the "divorce requirements" in 2018 and then the "surgery requirements" in 2023.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in New Jersey</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in New Jersey have the same legal rights as non-LGBT people. LGBT persons in New Jersey enjoy strong protections from discrimination, and have had the right to marry since October 21, 2013.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in South Australia</span>

The rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in the Australian state of South Australia are advanced and well-established. South Australia has had a chequered history with respect to the rights of LGBT people. Initially, the state was a national pioneer of LGBT rights in Australia, being the first in the country to decriminalise homosexuality and to introduce a non-discriminatory age of consent for all sexual activity. Subsequently, the state fell behind other Australian jurisdictions in areas including relationship recognition and parenting, with the most recent law reforms regarding the recognition of same-sex relationships, LGBT adoption and strengthened anti-discrimination laws passed in 2016 and went into effect in 2017.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in California</span>

California is seen as one of the most liberal states in the U.S. in regard to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights, which have received nationwide recognition since the 1970s. Same-sex sexual activity has been legal in the state since 1976. Discrimination protections regarding sexual orientation and gender identity or expression were adopted statewide in 2003. Transgender people are also permitted to change their legal gender on official documents without any medical interventions, and mental health providers are prohibited from engaging in conversion therapy on minors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in New York</span>

The U.S. state of New York has generally been seen as socially liberal in regard to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights. LGBT travel guide Queer in the World states, "The fabulosity of Gay New York is unrivaled on Earth, and queer culture seeps into every corner of its five boroughs". The advocacy movement for LGBT rights in the state has been dated as far back as 1969 during the Stonewall riots in New York City. Same-sex sexual activity between consenting adults has been legal since the New York v. Onofre case in 1980. Same-sex marriage has been legal statewide since 2011, with some cities recognizing domestic partnerships between same-sex couples since 1998. Discrimination protections in credit, housing, employment, education, and public accommodation have explicitly included sexual orientation since 2003 and gender identity or expression since 2019. Transgender people in the state legally do not have to undergo sex reassignment surgery to change their sex or gender on official documents since 2014. In addition, both conversion therapy on minors and the gay and trans panic defense have been banned since 2019. Since 2021, commercial surrogacy has been legally available within New York State.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in Vermont</span>

The establishment of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights in the U.S. state of Vermont is a recent occurrence, with most progress having taken place in the late 20th and the early 21st centuries. Vermont was one of 37 U.S. states, along with the District of Columbia, that issued marriage licenses to same-sex couples until the landmark Supreme Court ruling of Obergefell v. Hodges, establishing equal marriage rights for same-sex couples nationwide.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in Connecticut</span>

The establishment of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) rights in the U.S. state of Connecticut is a recent phenomenon, with most advances in LGBT rights taking place in the late 20th century and early 21st century. Connecticut was the second U.S. state to enact two major pieces of pro-LGBT legislation; the repeal of the sodomy law in 1971 and the legalization of same-sex marriage in 2008. State law bans unfair discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing and public accommodations, and both conversion therapy and the gay panic defense are outlawed in the state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in the District of Columbia</span>

In the District of Columbia, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people enjoy the same rights as non-LGBT people. Along with the rest of the country, the District of Columbia recognizes and allows same-sex marriages. The percentage of same-sex households in the District of Columbia in 2008 was at 1.8%, the highest in the nation. This number had grown to 4.2% by early 2015.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in Maine</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in the U.S. state of Maine have the same legal rights as non-LGBT people. Same-sex marriage has been recognized in Maine since December 2012, following a referendum in which a majority of voters approved an initiative to legalize same-sex marriage. Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity is prohibited in the areas of employment, housing, credit and public accommodations. In addition, the use of conversion therapy on minors has been outlawed since 2019, and joint adoption is permitted for same-sex couples.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in Colorado</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in the U.S. state of Colorado enjoy the same rights as non-LGBT people. Same-sex sexual activity has been legal in Colorado since 1972. Same-sex marriage has been recognized since October 2014, and the state enacted civil unions in 2013, which provide some of the rights and benefits of marriage. State law also prohibits discrimination on account of sexual orientation and gender identity in employment, housing and public accommodations and the use of conversion therapy on minors. In July 2020, Colorado became the 11th US state to abolish the gay panic defense.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in Oregon</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in the U.S. state of Oregon have the same legal rights as non-LGBT people. Same-sex sexual activity is legal in Oregon, and same-sex marriage has been legal in the state since May 2014 when a federal judge declared the state's ban on such marriages unconstitutional. Previously, same-sex couples could only access domestic partnerships, which guaranteed most of the rights of marriage. Additionally, same-sex couples are allowed to jointly adopt, and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in the areas of employment, housing and public accommodations is outlawed in the state under the Oregon Equality Act, enacted in 2008. Conversion therapy on minors is also illegal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in Arizona</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in the U.S. state of Arizona may face legal challenges not experienced by non-LGBT residents. Same-sex sexual activity is legal in Arizona, and same-sex couples are able to marry and adopt. Nevertheless, the state provides only limited protections against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Several cities, including Phoenix and Tucson, have enacted ordinances to protect LGBT people from unfair discrimination in employment, housing and public accommodations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">LGBT rights in New Mexico</span>

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people in the U.S. state of New Mexico enjoy the same rights as non-LGBT people. New Mexico has seen prominent advances in gay and lesbian rights in recent decades. Same-sex sexual activity has been legal since 1975. Same-sex marriage is legal statewide in New Mexico, as is adoption and access to fertility treatments for lesbian couples. Same-sex couples now enjoy the same rights as heterosexual married couples. Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity is banned statewide in the areas of employment, housing and public accommodations. Additionally, conversion therapy on minors is prohibited in the state.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Outline of LGBT topics</span> Overview of and topical guide to LGBT topics

The following outline offers an overview and guide to LGBT topics.

References

  1. ↑ Michalski, N. D.; Nunez, N. (2022). "When is "Gay Panic" Accepted? Exploring Juror Characteristics and Case Type as Predictors of a Successful Gay Panic Defense". Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 37 (1–2): 782–803. doi:10.1177/0886260520912595. PMID   32316819. S2CID   216073698.
  2. 1 2 Worthen M (2020). Queers, Bis, and Straight Lies: An Intersectional Examination of LGBTQ Stigma. Routledge. ISBN   978-1315280318.
  3. 1 2 Fradella HF, Sumner JM (2016). Sex, Sexuality, Law, and (In)justice. Routledge. pp. 453–456. ISBN   978-1317528906.
  4. ↑ Chuang, HT; Addington, D. (October 1988). "Homosexual panic: a review of its concept". The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry . 33 (7): 613–7. doi:10.1177/070674378803300707. PMID   3197016. S2CID   30737407.
  5. 1 2 Jordan Blair Woods; Brad Sears; Christy Mallory (September 2016). "Gay and Trans Panic Defense". The Williams Institute - UCLA School of Law. Archived from the original on November 30, 2019.
  6. 1 2 Najdowski C, Stevenson M (2018). Criminal Juries in the 21st Century: Psychological Science and the Law. Oxford University Press. pp. 71–74. ISBN   978-0190658137. The gay and trans panic defenses are rooted in antiquated ideas that homosexuality and gender nonconformity are mental illnesses (Lee, 2013).
  7. 1 2 Feminist Analyses of Gendered Representations. Peter Lang. 2009. p. 82. ISBN   978-1433102769.
  8. 1 2 Fitzgerald, Kathleen J.; Grossman, Kandice L. (2020). Sociology of Sexualities. Sage. ISBN   978-1544370651.
  9. ↑ "LGBTQ+ Panic Defense". The National LGBT Bar Association. Retrieved November 1, 2019.
  10. ↑ "Edward J. Kempf, Psychiatrist, 86". The New York Times. December 14, 1971.
  11. ↑ Kempf, Edward (1920). "The psychopathology of the acute homosexual panic. Acute pernicious dissociation neuroses". Psychopathology. pp. 477–515. doi:10.1037/10580-010.
  12. ↑ Suffredini, Kasey. "Pride and Prejudice: The Homosexual Panic Defense". Boston College Law School. Boston College. Archived from the original on 2021-03-08. Retrieved 2019-06-02.
  13. ↑ American Psychiatric Association (1952). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (1 ed.). Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Association Mental Hospital Service. p. 121.
  14. ↑ "DSM". American Psychiatric Association.
  15. ↑ Glick, Burton (1959). "Homosexual Panic: Clinical and Theoretical Considerations". Nervous and Mental Disease. 129: 20–8. doi:10.1097/00005053-195907000-00003. PMID   13828460. S2CID   615775.
  16. ↑ "Gay and Trans Panic Defense". The LGBT Bar. Archived from the original on 2019-01-27. Retrieved 2020-12-19.
  17. ↑ "South Australia becomes final state to abolish 'gay panic' murder defence". ABC News. December 1, 2020 – via www.abc.net.au.
  18. 1 2 "LGBTQ+ "Panic" Defense".
  19. ↑ "Homosexual Advance Defence: Final Report of the Working Party" (DOC). September 1998. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  20. ↑ Meade, Amanda (October 23, 1995). "Gay rally puts 'panic defence' on trial". The Australian .
  21. 1 2 Blore, Kent (2012). "The Homosexual Advance Defence and the Campaign to Abolish it in Queensland: The Activist's Dilemma and the Politician's Paradox". QUT Law & Justice Journal. 12 (2). doi: 10.5204/qutlr.v12i2.489 .
  22. ↑ Caldwell, Felicity (March 21, 2017). "Gay panic laws pass Queensland Parliament, removing partial defence". Brisbane Times. Retrieved March 21, 2017.
  23. ↑ "CRIMES ACT 1900 - SECT 23 Trial for murder--partial defence of extreme provocation".
  24. 1 2 "The Provoking Operation of Provocation: Stage 1" (PDF). South Australian Law Reform Institute. April 2017. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  25. ↑ "Overview of Homosexual Advance Defence Laws Across Australia: South Australia Still to Enact Change". Time Base. July 5, 2017. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  26. ↑ Jones, Ruby (March 22, 2017). "South Australia Becomes Last State to Allow Gay Panic Defence for Murder". ABC News. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  27. ↑ R v Lindsay [2014] SASCFC 56 (3 June 2014), Court of Criminal Appeal (SA, Australia)
  28. ↑ Lindsay v the Queen [2015] HCA 17
  29. ↑ "Lindsay v the Queen" (PDF). High Court of Australia. May 6, 2015. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2015-09-21. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  30. ↑ R v Lindsay [2016] SASCFC 129 (8 December 2016), Court of Criminal Appeal (SA, Australia)
  31. ↑ Lindsay v The Queen [2017] HCATrans 131 (16 June 2017), High Court (Australia)
  32. ↑ Withers, Johnston. "South Australia abolishes the defence of provocation". Johnston Withers.
  33. ↑ "Student who killed sex worker after finding out she was trans found not guilty of murder". pinknews. Feb 24, 2023.
  34. ↑ "Colombian student not guilty of murder of sex worker in Coogee". Sydney Morning Herald.
  35. ↑ "Colombian student guilty of killing trans sex worker". Yahoo News.
  36. ↑ "Homicide detectives continue inquiry into designer's death". NZ Herald News. July 28, 2003. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  37. ↑ "McNee's killer appeals against sentence". The Dominion Post. February 17, 2005. p. 3. Phillip Layton Edwards has appealed against his nine-year prison sentence for the manslaughter of television interior designer David McNee, claiming other young men who killed in similar circumstances received shorter jail terms. In the Court of Appeal at Auckland yesterday, his lawyer Roy Wade pointed to two cases in which young men who killed an older man who made homosexual advances received terms of four and three years ... Mr McNee, 55, the star of television show 'My House, My Castle', died in the bedroom of his St Mary's Bay home in July 2003 after choking on his own vomit while unconscious. Edwards had hit him 30 to 40 times in the head and face in a beating a pathologist described as severe.
  38. ↑ Boland, Mary Jane (July 9, 2006). "Move to end provocation defence for gay murders". The Sunday Star-Times. p. 8. The McNee case was a classic example of the law not protecting gay men," Lambert said. "It's abhorrent to suggest that we should downplay the seriousness of what Edwards did because he was hit on.
  39. ↑ "Gay MP calls for change to law". The New Zealand Herald . July 10, 2009. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  40. ↑ Koubaridis, Andrew (July 10, 2009). "Gay community calls for justice over banjo killing". The New Zealand Herald . Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  41. ↑ Hartevelt, John (November 27, 2009). "Parliament scraps partial defence of provocation". The Press . Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  42. ↑ Lendon, Brad (September 8, 2020). "US Marine pardoned by Philippines for killing of transgender woman". CNN. Retrieved September 8, 2020.
  43. ↑ "No 'Portsmouth defence': Father and child let down and others". The Independent (letters). November 6, 2003. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  44. ↑ Toolis, Kevin (November 25, 1995). "A Queer Verdict". The Guardian. p. T14. It happens time and again. The killings are vicious, but the killers escape a murder conviction. Why? Because they field the 'homosexual panic' defence: they claim they lost control when their victim made a pass at them. And juries go along with it.
  45. ↑ Galloway, Bruce (1983). Prejudice and pride: discrimination against gay people in modern Britain . London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. p.  67. ISBN   0-7100-9916-9.
  46. ↑ Lalor, Peter (November 4, 1995). "He was just a poof". The Daily Telegraph Mirror.
  47. ↑ S.3188, Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2018
  48. ↑ H.R.6358, Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2018
  49. 1 2 3 Ring, Trudy (June 5, 2019). "Bill in Congress Would Ban Gay, Trans 'Panic' Defenses". The Advocate . Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  50. 1 2 3 Crittenton, Anya (June 5, 2019). "Democrats are hoping to ban the gay and trans panic defense – again". Gay Star News. Archived from the original on July 30, 2019. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  51. ↑ S.1721, Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2019
  52. ↑ H.R.3133, Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2019
  53. ↑ "Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2019 (2019 - S. 1721)". GovTrack.us. Retrieved September 11, 2021.
  54. ↑ "Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2021 (S. 1137)". GovTrack.us. Retrieved September 11, 2021.
  55. ↑ Kane, Christopher (2023-06-28). "Markey, Pappas introduce bill to ban use of the LGBTQ panic defense". www.washingtonblade.com. Retrieved 2023-08-22.
  56. ↑ California State Assembly. "The Gwen Araujo Justice for Victims Act". Session of the Legislature. Statutes of California (House Resolution). State of California. Ch. 550 p. 4617. An act to add Section 1127h to the Penal Code, relating to crime. [Approved by Governor September 28, 2006. Filed with Secretary of State September 28, 2006]
  57. ↑ "The Gwen Araujo Justice for Victims Act". California Secretary of State. February 22, 2005. Retrieved June 1, 2019.

     SEC. 3. Section 1127h is added to the Penal Code, to read:

    1127h. In any criminal trial or proceeding, upon the request of a party, the court shall instruct the jury substantially as follows:
    "Do not let bias, sympathy, prejudice, or public opinion influence your decision. Bias includes bias against the victim or victims, witnesses, or defendant based upon his or her disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, gender identity, or sexual orientation."

     SEC. 4. The Office of Emergency Services shall, to the extent funding becomes available for that purpose, develop practice materials for district attorneys' offices in the state. The materials, which shall be developed in consultation with knowledgeable community organizations and county officials, shall explain how panic strategies are used to encourage jurors to respond to societal bias against people based on actual or perceived disability, gender, including gender identity, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation and provide best practices for preventing bias from affecting the outcome of a trial.

  58. ↑ Carter, Terry (August 12, 2013). "'Gay panic' criminal defense strategies should be curtailed by legislation, ABA House resolves" . Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  59. 1 2 "Resolution" (PDF). American Bar Association, House of Delegates. August 12–13, 2013. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2017-03-10. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  60. 1 2 California State Assembly. " Session of the Legislature". Session of the Legislature. Statutes of California (House Resolution). State of California. Ch. 684.

    An act to amend Section 192 of the Penal Code, relating to manslaughter.
    [Approved by Governor September 27, 2014. Filed with Secretary of State September 27, 2014.] [...]

    SECTION 1. Section 192 of the Penal Code is amended to read:
    192. Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice. It is of three kinds:
    (a) Voluntary—upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion.
    [...]
    (f) (1) For purposes of determining sudden quarrel or heat of passion pursuant to subdivision (a), the provocation was not objectively reasonable if it resulted from the discovery of, knowledge about, or potential disclosure of the victim's actual or perceived gender, gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation, including under circumstances in which the victim made an unwanted nonforcible romantic or sexual advance towards the defendant, or if the defendant and victim dated or had a romantic or sexual relationship. Nothing in this section shall preclude the jury from considering all relevant facts to determine whether the defendant was in fact provoked for purposes of establishing subjective provocation.
    (2) For purposes of this subdivision, "gender" includes a person's gender identity and gender-related appearance and behavior regardless of whether that appearance or behavior is associated with the person's gender as determined at birth.

  61. 1 2 "SB1761: Criminal Code – Sexual Orientation". Illinois General Assembly. 2017. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  62. 1 2 "An Act relating to criminal procedure – trials". State of Rhode Island General Assembly. January 3, 2018. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  63. 1 2 "An Act concerning gay and transgender panic defense" (PDF). Connecticut General Assembly. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  64. 1 2 "HB711 HD1 SD1: Relating to Criminal Defense". 2019. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  65. 1 2 "An Act Regarding Criminal Procedure with Respect to Allowable Defenses". Maine Legislature. 2019. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  66. 1 2 "Nevada Senate Bill SB97". 80th Nevada State Legislature. 2019. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  67. ↑ "S07048: Restricts the nature of extreme emotional disturbance as an affirmative defense to a charge of murder in the second degree". New York State Assembly. Retrieved November 22, 2019.
  68. ↑ "A05467: Restricts the nature of extreme emotional disturbance as an affirmative defense to a charge of murder in the second degree". New York State Assembly. Retrieved November 22, 2019.
  69. ↑ "S00499: Restricts the nature of extreme emotional disturbance as an affirmative defense to a charge of murder in the second degree". New York State Assembly. Retrieved November 22, 2019.
  70. ↑ "A05001: Restricts the nature of extreme emotional disturbance as an affirmative defense to a charge of murder in the second degree". New York State Assembly. Retrieved November 22, 2019.
  71. ↑ "S00050: Restricts the nature of extreme emotional disturbance as an affirmative defense to a charge of murder in the second degree". New York State Assembly. Retrieved November 22, 2019.
  72. ↑ "A02707: Restricts the nature of extreme emotional disturbance as an affirmative defense to a charge of murder in the second degree". New York State Assembly. Retrieved November 22, 2019.
  73. 1 2 Hoylman, Brad (2019). "Senate Bill S3293". The New York State Senate. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  74. ↑ "A4083: An Act concerning homicide committed in the heat of passion and amending N.J.S.2C:11-4". State of New Jersey, 216th Legislature. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  75. ↑ "A429: An Act concerning homicide committed in the heat of passion and amending N.J.S.2C:11-4". State of New Jersey, 217th Legislature. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  76. ↑ "A1796: An Act concerning homicide committed in the heat of passion and amending N.J.S.2C:11-4". State of New Jersey, 218th Legislature. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  77. ↑ "S2609: An Act concerning homicide committed in the heat of passion and amending N.J.S.2C:11-4". State of New Jersey, 218th Legislature. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  78. ↑ "B22-0102 - Secure A Fair and Equitable Trial Act of 2017". Council of the District of Columbia. February 7, 2017. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  79. ↑ "B23-0409" (PDF). Council of the District of Columbia. Retrieved January 27, 2021.
  80. ↑ "HB 931: Crimes and offenses; disclosure of individual's sexual orientation or gender identity as being serious provocation in the context of voluntary manslaughter; exclude". Georgia General Assembly. Retrieved November 22, 2019.
  81. ↑ "AB 436: An Act to create 939.44 (3) and 939.48 (5m) of the statutes; relating to: eliminating criminal defense of adequate provocation or self-defense if the claim is based on the victim's gender identity or sexual orientation". Wisconsin State Legislature. Retrieved January 27, 2021.
  82. ↑ "HB 1687: Limiting defenses based on victim identity". Washington State Legislature. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  83. ↑ "House Bill 2333: An Act amending Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, in general provisions relating to offenses involving danger to the person, further providing for definitions". Pennsylvania General Assembly . Retrieved January 27, 2021.
  84. ↑ "Gay Panic Or Transgender Panic Defense". Colorado General Assembly. Retrieved August 1, 2020.
  85. ↑ "HB 73: An Act relating to a limitation on the use of a victim's gender identity or sexual orientation as the basis for a defense in the trial of a criminal offense" (PDF). Texas Legislature Online. Retrieved February 26, 2021.
  86. ↑ "Texas HB73 | 2021-2022 | 87th Legislature".
  87. ↑ "House Bill 2132: A Bill to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Article 1 of Chapter 4 of Title 18.2 a section numbered 18.2-37.1 and by adding in Article 4 of Chapter 4 of Title 18.2 a section numbered 18.2-57.5, relating to homicides and assaults and bodily woundings; certain matters not to constitute defenses". The Virginia House of Delegates. Retrieved January 27, 2021.
  88. ↑ "House Bill 231: An Act concerning Crimes – Mitigation – Race, Color, National Origin, Sex, Gender Identity, or Sexual Orientation" (PDF). The Maryland State Legislature . Retrieved January 27, 2021.
  89. ↑ "HB-3020 - A Bill for An Act relating to prohibiting defenses based on certain characteristics of the victim; creating new pro- visions; and amending ORS 161.215 and 163.135". The Oregon State Legislature. January 21, 2021. Retrieved February 1, 2021.
  90. ↑ "SB-704 – A Bill for An Act relating to prohibiting defenses based on certain characteristics of the victim; creating new pro- visions; and amending ORS 161.215 and 163.135". The Oregon State Legislature. January 22, 2021. Retrieved February 1, 2021.
  91. ↑ Small, Taylor. "HB 128" (PDF). Vermont General Assembly. Retrieved February 25, 2021.
  92. ↑ "Senate Bill 718: A bill to be entitled". The Florida State Senate . Retrieved January 27, 2021.
  93. ↑ "A BILL FOR An Act relating to the defenses of justification and diminished capacity for certain violent crime". The Iowa Legislature . Retrieved March 20, 2021.
  94. ↑ Candelaria, Jacob. "SB 213: An Act Relating To Crime; Prohibiting A Defense Based On A Defendant's Discovery Of, Knowledge About Or The Potential Disclosure Of A Victim's Or Witness's Gender, Gender Identity, Gender Expression Or Sexual Orientation; Prohibiting A Defense Based On The Effect On A Defendant Of Being Romantically Propositioned In A Nonviolent Or Non-threatening Manner By A Person Of The Same Gender Or A Person Who Is Transgender" (PDF). New Mexico Legislature. Retrieved February 5, 2021.
  95. ↑ "SF 360: A bill for an act relating to state government; establishing a Council on LGBTQI Minnesotans; limiting criminal defenses and authorization for the use of force relating to a victim's sexual orientation or identity; prohibiting conversion therapy with children vulnerable adults; prohibiting medical assistance coverage for conversion therapy; prohibiting the misrepresentation of conversion therapy services or products; amending Minnesota Statutes 2020, sections 256B.0625, by adding a subdivision; 257.56; 325F.69, by adding a subdivision; 609.06, by adding a subdivision; 609.075; 609.20; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapters 15; 214". Office of the Revisor of Statutes, Minnesota Legislature. Retrieved February 26, 2021.
  96. ↑ "HD-2275 – An Act protecting LGBTQ victims" (PDF). The Massachusetts State Legislature. Retrieved March 1, 2021.
  97. ↑ "SD-1183 – An Act protecting LGBTQ victims" (PDF). The Massachusetts State Legislature. Retrieved March 1, 2021.
  98. ↑ "Legislative Bill 321: A Bill for An Act relating to crimes and offenses; to prohibit a defendant's discovery of a victim's actual or perceived gender or sexual orientation as a defense to criminal offenses; to define terms; and to provide a duty for the Revisor of Statutes" (PDF). The Legislature of Nebraska . Retrieved January 27, 2021.
  99. ↑ "HB 238". General Court of New Hampshire. Retrieved February 26, 2021.
  100. ↑ "'Gay panic' defense eliminated in New Hampshire starting next year". Portsmouth Herald. Retrieved 2023-08-22.
  101. ↑ "New Hampshire HB315 | 2023 | Regular Session". LegiScan. Retrieved 2023-06-27.
  102. ↑ Sprayregen, Molly (2023-10-03). "Delaware bans LGBTQ+ panic defense with overwhelming bipartisan support". LGBTQ Nation. Retrieved 2023-10-03.
  103. ↑ "Bill Detail - Delaware General Assembly". legis.delaware.gov. Retrieved 2023-10-03.
  104. ↑ "Michigan Legislature - House Bill 4718 (2023)". www.legislature.mi.gov. Retrieved 2023-10-03.
  105. ↑ Ferguson, David (October 1, 2014). "New California law eliminates 'gay panic' as a defense for attacks on LGBT people" . Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  106. ↑ Riley, John (August 28, 2017). "Illinois governor signs 'gay panic' and trans birth certificate bills into law". Metro Weekly. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  107. ↑ "Rhode Island House Bill 7066, Regular Session, 2018". LegiScan. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  108. ↑ "Rhode Island Senate Bill 3014, Regular Session, 2018". LegiScan. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  109. ↑ Gregg, Katherine (May 22, 2018). "R.I. House votes to end 'gay or trans panic' defense". Providence Journal. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  110. ↑ Avery, Dan (January 25, 2019). "New York lawmakers have officially banned 'gay and trans panic defense' in murder cases". NBC News. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  111. ↑ Joseph, Elizabeth; Croft, Jay (June 30, 2019). "New York bans gay and trans 'panic' defenses". CNN . Retrieved June 30, 2019.
  112. ↑ "SB2 HD1: Relating to Criminal Defense". 2019. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  113. ↑ Ladao, Mark (June 26, 2019). "Gov. Ige signs bill allowing non-binary gender designations on driver's licenses". Honolulu Star-Advertiser. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  114. ↑ Glauert, Rik (April 17, 2019). "Nevada moves towards banning 'gay panic' defense". Gay Star News. Archived from the original on May 20, 2019. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  115. ↑ "Connecticut lawmakers move to ban 'gay panic defense'". Yahoo News. Associated Press. June 4, 2019. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  116. ↑ Altimari, Daniela (June 4, 2019). "Bill banning gay panic defense gets final passage in the House". Hartford Courant. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
  117. ↑ "Movement Advancement Project | Gay/Trans Panic Defense Bans". www.lgbtmap.org.
  118. ↑ "N.J. Bans 'Gay Panic' Murder Defense and Not One Legislator Objects". The Advocate. January 21, 2020. Retrieved January 21, 2020.
  119. ↑ "Washington State Bans 'Gay Panic' Defense of Homicide". March 6, 2020.
  120. ↑ "Washington approves Nikki Kuhnhausen Bill to ban 'gay panic' defense of homicide". KATU. Associated Press. February 27, 2020.
  121. ↑ "Washington State Legislature". app.leg.wa.gov.
  122. ↑ Burness, Alex (July 13, 2020). "Colorado becomes 11th state to ban LGBTQ 'panic defense'". The Denver Post. Retrieved August 1, 2020.
  123. ↑ "D.C. Council approves bill banning LGBTQ panic defense". Washington Blade. December 16, 2020. Retrieved December 20, 2020.
  124. 1 2 Lee, Cynthia (2008). "The Gay Panic Defense". UC Davis Law Review. 42: 471–566. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
  125. ↑ Salerno, Jessica M.; Najdowski, Cynthia J.; Harrington, Evan; Kemner, Gretchen; Dave, Reetu (February 2015). "Excusing Murder? Conservative Jurors' Acceptance of the Gay-panic defense". Psychology, Public Policy, and Law. 21 (1): 24–34. doi:10.1037/law0000024. S2CID   145623462 . Retrieved June 1, 2019. The gay-panic defense is a specific type of provocation defense in which the defendant claims that the crime in question was the result of a sudden and intense passion provoked by the victim's unwanted same-gender sexual advance. It is primarily used by straight men claiming that they found the experience of an unwanted same-gender sexual advance so upsetting that they temporarily became enraged and lost control of their own behavior (Lee, 2008). Chen (2000) argues that the acceptance of a gay-panic defense implies acceptance of a nonviolent same-gender sexual advance as an adequate trigger to cause a person to fall into an uncontrollable state of panic. If jurors collectively agree that the reaction was reasonable, they can find the defendant guilty of a lesser offense, which often results in a lesser sentence (Lee, 2008).
  126. ↑ "National News Briefs; Jury Selection Begins In 'Jenny Jones' Lawsuit". The New York Times . March 30, 1999. Archived from the original on September 11, 2017. Retrieved January 14, 2023.
  127. ↑ Dart, Tom (May 12, 2018). "After decades of 'gay panic defence' in court, US states slowly begin to ban tactic". The Guardian . Archived from the original on June 5, 2018. Retrieved January 14, 2023.
  128. 1 2 Bettcher, Talia Mae (2007). "Evil Deceivers and Make-Believers: On Transphobic Violence and the Politics of Illusion". Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy . 22 (3): 44. doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.2007.tb01090.x. S2CID   18183513.
  129. ↑ Szymanski, Zak (September 15, 2005). "Two murder convictions in Araujo case". BayAreaReporter. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
  130. ↑ Whaley, Monte (September 18, 2008). "Smile called 'provoking act' in transgender case". The Denver Post. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
  131. ↑ Frosch, Dan (April 22, 2009). "Murder and Hate Verdict in Transgender Case". The New York Times. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
  132. ↑ Schwirtz, Michael (September 8, 2013). "Embarking on a New Life, Transgender Woman Has It Brutally Taken". The New York Times. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
  133. 1 2 McKinley, James C. Jr. (April 2, 2016). "Man's Confession in Transgender Woman's Death Is Admissible, Judge Rules". The New York Times. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
  134. 1 2 McKinley, James C. Jr. (March 3, 2015). "Manslaughter Charges in Beating Death of Transgender Woman in 2013". The New York Times. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
  135. ↑ McKinley, James C. Jr. (April 19, 2016). "Man Sentenced to 12 Years in Beating Death of Transgender Woman". The New York Times. Retrieved June 2, 2019.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.