On what grounds?
To the OP - I don’t see any validity to any of the panic defenses. In this case, removing the young woman from the premises before murdering her shows a level of thinking that I cannot correlate to any panicked mental state.
Speaking only in hypotheticals, if marriage were involved, wouldn’t breach of contract be possible? Since children are a common result and reason for marriage (though not an end-all and be-all) wouldn’t finding out after a marriage ceremony had taken place that one’s partner is sterile because of gender-reassignment surgery be cause for breach of contract?
On the other hand, does that mean that someone found, with no foreknowledge of the condition, to be sterile after the marriage be liable under the same thinking? I’d think not, since there’s the difference in foreknowledge, but I don’t know that I’d like the legal precedent.
I’m not a lawyer, but my answer to all three is “I really doubt it.”
The fact that they took their victim to some other location and acted as a group would (to me) toss the “panic defense” right out. It shows premeditation and deliberate action. Panic or passion means Right Now At This Moment. Panic or Passion to me would be “smash bang - holy shit what have I done”. This was a deliberate premeditated murder and should be treated as harshly as the law allows.
You may be right.
I’m not going to fight to make this stick. Just a quick gut reaction to the previous question.
Would you consider mental damages a potential argument? Or do you think that the idea of a civil suit for is insupportable? Just curious as to your thinking, if you don’t mind sharing it.
Odd trans-panic FOAF story: a MTF TGI sought out some youths who’d been mean to him (when he was a “him”) and had sex with 'em, then let them know what they’d done. One of them was creeped out enough by the revelation that he killed himself, so in some people the revulsion really does run that deep.
That said, pre-meditated killing oughtn’t to be ameliorated with a “panic” defence. OTOH, I’m very leery about buying any excuse for pre-meditated killing.
This weirds me out, I mean, close up and personal enough for anal sex, and yet nobody notices the presence of a nutsack? :eek:
You’re mixing apples and… and some sort of strange fruit from the South Pacific, I think.
What you describe – a marriage entered into when one partner knows of his or her sterility due to previous gender reassignment surgery but deliberately conceals that fact – would certainly be grounds for annullment of the marriage. Indeed, in some states, a person’s gender is defined as that which they were born with, so a (for example) FTM transsexual marrying a woman would be viewed as a woman marrying a woman, the marriage would be void ab initio.
You appear to be thinking of some civil suit remedy that might exist beyond the annulment of the marriage. I’m no expert on civil law, and I’ll allow that there might me some cause of action somewhere in there. But as a general proposition, I think the remedy for a marriage contracted by deception is an annulment.
Okay, thanks, Bricker.
I was right with you up till “furry panic defense.” Now my opinion has completely swung in the other direction.
#1 Assuming your unsupported FOAF story is true
#2 I don’t hold a transpanic defense as grounds for acquital in any event.
I’d guess that Gwen was either very careful and creative in hiding things during sex or that she was wearing a gaff or other undergarment designed to minimize and conceal her anatomy.
#1: Yes, assuming. It happened in South Africa, and I’ve never even been there.
#2: Nor did I. You did read my earlier post? :dubious:
unnumbered: Though it does not excuse killing him or her, that level of intent to deceive is buying a world of hurt. Perhaps it shouldn’t oughtta be that way, but that’s another story.
Well, you have a point … I guess furries should be handled with kid gloves …
Didn’t they use this sucessfully for defending the running over of a ‘Goth’ kid in Amarillo TX?
Barrenness (at least of the woman) has always been grounds for divorce. However, since every state except Utah now has non-fault divorce, grounds are largely irrelevant and you can get a divorce anyway. I suspect that failure to disclose one’s own sterility would be grounds for an annulment in most states.
Furthermore, in some states a post-operative transsexual is still legally the sex they were born as, and any marriage contracted in such a state would be void ab initio (since as far as I know all such states also have a DOMA-type law defining marriage as between “one man and one woman”).
Somewhere, presumably outside the United States, that doesn’t follow the Standards of Care. Mexico and Thailand both spring to mind – although anyone who has reassignment surgery in Mexico is just asking for trouble.
Um…
Good post.
Just what I would have said.
Depends on the jurisdiction. IIRC the majority of murder convictions across the country are “second degree” or otherwise non-capital.