Isn’t this just a variant of the “temporary insanity” defense that regularly gets kicked out? Why should “transgender panic” be accorded more weight legally, psychologically or morally than “I just went nuts”?
Expert backs ‘panic’ defense - Sex with transgender teen might prompt partners to ‘flip out’
I would say about as legitimate as a Twenky defense.
A panic situation doesn’t fit with the particulars of the murder. Araujo was removed from the scene of the party and killed some time after the “discovery”. When a female at the party asked what happened, the suspect said something along the lines of “Let’s just say he took the long way home”. Sounds pretty calculated and cold blooded for me.
I hope to God that this doesn’t work out. I can’t imagine it being officially okay to kill trans people if they freak you out. I already know enough people who live in fear everyday because they know that being simply being transgendered can end up with them getting beat up or killed. I can’t imagine how this would affect them.
It makes less sense than somebody killing a male transvestite who gave him a blowjob.
Which is not much sense at all.
The short answer is that if the jury buys it, then it’s legitimate.
The jury is the finder of fact. If they find that the accused suffered from a reaction that diminished his capacity to understand or appreciate what he was doing, then manslaughter is the appropriate charge. This is a bit different from the generic “temporary insanity” business that gets bandied about in popular press, in which an accused is seeking a full not-guilty-by-reason-of- verdict. In this case, the accused’s defense is that this “panic” negated the intent required for a murder conviction, but not the general intent required for a manslaugter conviction.
It’s more buyable to me than the “Twinky defense,” but not by a heck of a lot. While I can understand reactions such as anger or even shame at finding yourself in such a situation, I cannot comprehend how it might lead to loss of such control as to cause you to kill.
Of course, I didn’t hear the expert testify. Perhaps it would be mnore understandable if I had.
That ‘disorder’ can be easily cured by playing ‘Lola’ repeatedly.
That seems to be what the defense is going for in this case. All they need is one juror to sympathize with the argument – the defendants have been charged in the alternative, and it’s not very likely that the jury will fail to find them guilty on the manslaughter charge or the hate crime charge. This is a strategy to avoid the death penalty, not one to avoid conviction, as even a conviction on manslaughter is likely to lead to a long prison term.
I think the gay panic defense is basically just a contrivance for potentially homophobic jurors to hang an acquittal on or at least get some idiot to hang the jury.
IMO, it’s a subtle way to argue that the victim deserved it without coming out and saying so. All you need is one trogolodyte juror to buy it and you stop a murder conviction.
Personally, I hope these scumbags are convicted and sent to a joint where they will really learn the meaning of gay panic.
Like even sven, this story is close to home for me-- just across the bay in the same metropolitan area. I have no doubt these guys panicked when they found out that “Gwen” was really a guy. But there are many, many ways of dealing with that reaction other than killing the young man. This seems more like a post hoc rationalization rather than a legitimate defense.
I think DtC is pretty much on the mark. The defense is trying to have the jurors think: “how would you feel if you found out the girl you messed around with was actually a guy”?
This was a brutal murder that was covered up, and the guilty men should suffer the full weight of the law in this matter.
Ther young lady–please, let’s at least give the poor girl that much.
Sounds like these three dudes were a bunch of losers. Using someone for sexual pleasure outside of a relationship, then getting pissed over the freebie they got and going back to demand death for satisfaction.
No honor, no guts–premeditation and complete scumbaggery.
Oh, I think we can dispose of the trans panic defense with a little word substitution:
Republican panic defense
mild bondage panic defense
postal panic defense
furry panic defense
cheese panic defense
Any jury that buys this has shit for brains.
What is a Twenky Defense?
When Matthew (sorry…I forgot his last name) was hung on that fence to die, I believe they used the “panic defense” to keep their sorry asses from rotting in jail. Although it wasn’t a “trans” case, it was basically the same thing. It didn’t fly. However, as someone said earlier, if an attorney can get the jury to buy it, it will stand.
AKA the “Twinkie Defense”
My problem is more with the whole ‘crime of passion’ argument in general than this particular example.
Otara
From all I’ve read, the victim was a transexual not a transvestite. A transvestite may at times dress in the clothing of the opposite gender (I ain’t thrilled with the phrase opposite gender either, but that’s a whole other thread), but they identify as and are quite happy with the gender on their birth certificate. A transexual dresses as the gender they feel themselves to be, rather than the gender dictated by external anatomy or the birth certificate.
IANAL What are the standards (if any) for crimes of passion? They found out. Then, made and executed a plan with malice aforethought. That would seem to be the classic definition of murder.
Update: A mistrial has been declared in this case. It seems that at least some of the jurors were buying the “transgender panic” defense.
The prosecutor is promising to retry the case.
If I were intimate with a woman and I found out later she was biologically a male I’d be pretty upset. I might feel anger and humilation and those emotions might be compounded if some of my peers knew we had slept together. As a juror it would be my responsibility to take into account the state of mind of the defendants.
I don’t know how similiar this is to gay panic defenses. I’ve never heard of a gay panic defense used because a heterosexual man unknowingly had sex with another man. I’ve only heard it used in conjunction with bashing in response to passes or flirtatious behavior. That’s pretty easy for me to dismiss because the level of intimacy is a lot lower then someone who you just had sex with.
Is there any difference between this murder and the murder of someone simply becaues they were transgendered?
Marc
From one of the journalist who has been covering the trial, it appears that they didn’t buy it.