“Gay Panic Defense” and “Trans Panic Defense”
Have you ever heard of the gay or trans panic defense?
This is something I didn’t learn about until more recently but it’s been used or at least attempted to be used in court cases throughout the decades.
“Gay Panic Defense” is essentially a claim by a defendant in a court case generally where the defendant is facing either assault or murder charges, by which they claim that they “acted in a brief moment of temporary insanity caused by the individual or the victim’s sexual orientation”.
They try to play it off as the result of “percieved unwanted homosexual advances”.
As of current, use of this defense has been banned in California, Rhode Island, and Illinois.
In 2013, The American Bar Association also put out a statement urging other states to also knock down this “defense”.
Similarly, there is also a defense known as the “Trans Panic Defense” which operates in a very similar fashion but what’s more interesting and disturbing about “Trans Panic Defense” is generally it is used or attempted to be used in cases where the defendant is facing a murder charge.
In “Trans Panic Defense”, people try to argue that they were unaware of their victims gender identity even though they have already had sex with them. Or, in some cases, these people have had a long relationship with the individual whether it be online or offline.
It’s been used in cases where the perpetrator either right before the act had sex or a sexual act with the victim.
Why in the world would anybody be trying to entertain these ideas as valid?
What’s really alarming is the notion that “Trans Panic Defense” seems to be gaining traction among some circles of people as we saw in the backlash over the murder of Dee Whigham, who was stabbed 119 times after the perpetrator found out that she was transgender even though the perpetrator had a relationship with this trans woman for many months beforehand.
Gay Panic and Trans Panic Defenses are completely useless in our society.
Gay Panic and Trans Panic Defenses are utter nonsense.
And, allowing these types of defenses to be heard in court only furthers discrimination and bigotry, and, in a way attempts to justify the murder of another person based upon their sexual orientation or gender identity.