FWIW, I didn’t notice this thread beforehand, and started a new pit thread on the jury verdict. Apologies.
The interpretation of the nonverdict offered at the link you provided is invalid. The jury did not hang deciding between murder one and murder two; rather, they were unable to decide as to whether murder one applied or not. We cannot conclude anything about the jury’s state of mind regarding the lesser and included offenses, because they have to consider the charges in decreasing order of severity. They weren’t able to decide as to murder one, and therefore never (officially, at least) made any judgment at all regarding murder two or manslaughter. There’s no way to know if the jury would also have hung on the question of murder two or manslaughter (although it is a logical conclusion that they would not have acquitted).
I live in the next town over, and my wife’s hairdresser is related to the victim. The assertion that the jury did not buy the argument is correct, because the jury was polled by the prosecution afterward. It is also true that they did not explicit.ly reject the manslaughter plea, but all seemed to be willing to vote for at least murder 2. I believe it was 7 - 5 for murder 1 for the first defendant (Magidson) , and 10 - 2 to acquit the others of murder 1. No one was budging, so a mistrial was declared.
Here’s a llink to the story about the defense not working.
I believe the poor man’s name was Matthew Sheppard, this is just from memory though.
Yep, they know all it will take is one homophone on the jury to cause major trouble. And I’d guess that statistically they stand a good chance of finding one in a small group.
Latest update: It’s murder two for two of the defendents, and another mistrial for the third. How this was neither first degree murder, nor a hate crime, mystifies me, but at least it’s a measure of justice.
If I found out that rich old Grandpa were annoyed with me and going to his lawyer first thing in the morning to cut me out of his will, I might feel anger and humiliation.
If I killed him before he could act on that plan, I wouldn’t expect a jury to show the slightest sympathy – indeed, this would be considered an aggrivating rather than a mitigating circumstances.
The young lady that was killed was wrong for not identifying herself as transgendered before sexual contact but by no means is her murder anything less then murder. Murder is just that, and I do not like most of the laws that allow murder to be downgraded. A drunk driver who runs over a person is a murderer just as much as the person who picks up a gun and shoots someone. These men who killed this young lady are murderers, whether panicked, whether drunk, whether under the influence shouldn’t matter. They took a human life, not accidently, but on purpose, thats murder.
I don’t agree with your premise that she was wrong for not revealing her gender history before sexual contact; at least she was no more wrong than the people who engaged in casual sexual contact with her in the first place. But this has been argued to death already, so I won’t press the issue.
Under the criminal statutes of most states we take into account the conditions of the crime. If you open a door real fast and give me a concussion it isn’t the same as you picking up a baseball bat and giving me a concussion even though the results might be similiar. They’re still murderers but they’re guilty of a lesser degree of murder. I can understand why the jurors rejected the hate crime charges and went with the lesser degree of murder.
Marc
Can someone enlighten me on what “biologically a male” means in this case? I assume this person was surgically altered to be indistinguishable from a female, so that she was only male in her chromosomes.
I believe folks should be very open with each other before having sex, so it would piss me of royally to fine out what these guys found out, but only from tne aspect of being lied to. It certainly would not disgust me or cause me to panic. I would just write this person off as being unreliable.
I cannot imagine being a female with a male body, or vice versa. What a nightmare. I have nothing but repect and admiration for someone with the courage to pursue TG surgery.
You bring up a good point, I can’t exactly blame a TG individual for not disclosing all the information. I mean, when should it be brought up? “Hi, I’m Gwen. By the way I was born with male organs.” Taking into account the interest of both individuals I’m not sure there’s any one right answer.
Marc
Everything I am reading, there is nothing that says she didn’t still have a penis, so I think she should of made that information known before going forward in a sexual relationship. Not that its an excuse for murder, its not, it would of been in her best interest.
If I were a juror I’d have a great deal of trouble with the term “panic” as used here. If a bee lands on my nose I might panic and jump around and try to swat it. But if my response were to grab the bee and carry it out of the building to an undisclosed location where I squashed it to death, I wouldn’t describe that response as a “panic.”
It should be noted, the “Twinkie defense” has been successful at least once in rejecting a murder charge in favor of manslaughter. So if the “trans-panic” defense is slightly stronger than the Twinkie Defense and the Twinkie Defense met the standard of “a jury bought it” then the “trans-panic” defense should be taken seriously.
Enjoy,
Steven
Just out of curiosity, where does a 17-year-old get a sex change?
Or is this a case where “having sex” just means that Araujo performed a blowjob without removing his/her own clothing, providing no visual clues that she wasn’t really a she?
Not being a wiseass - I just think I’m missing something here.
Well, in this case, she had not yet had surgery. She had had anal sex with the man (claiming to be on her period). I wouldn’t be surprised if a 17-year old can’t even have the surgery even if they could afford it.
I understand why the hate crime charges were rejected, but, given that the victim was removed to a separate site to be killed, wouldn’t that show premeditation of some sort? If she were killed on the spot, I could see it as second degree murder, but I could be wrong.
Isn’t a double felony (kidnapping leading to murder) almost always considered 1st degree murder? For that matter, isn’t it usually considered a capital offense as well?
Or was it established that the victim went with them of her own accord?
The way a normal person would deal with a partner not being of the sex he/she claims(appears) to be would be a civil lawsuit which they are likely to win. Making that information known should prevent the possibility of financial loss, it shouldn’t be mandatory in order to keep breathing. I don’t buy the panic excuse, its too easy to fake.
I said it would be in her best interest. Not mandatory. I don’t buy the panic excuse either, I wouldn’t buy it if the murder was committed during the actual sex act, (reach around gone bad) Murder is murder. But much like defensive driving, I believe you should also be defensive in life to avoid being put in a situation where your life is put in danger, needlessly.