Gay panic defense

This article is about the legal defense against violent crimes. For the psychiatric term, see Homosexual panic.

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]

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 a 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

Main article: Homosexual panic

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^[update] 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

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

State	Considered	Banned	Bill	Ref
California	—	2014	AB2501	^[60]
Illinois	—	2017	SB1761	^[61]
Rhode Island	—	2018	H7066aa/S3014	^[62]
Connecticut	—	2019	SB-0058	^[63]
Hawaii	—	2019	HB711	^[64]
Maine	—	2019	LD1632	^[65]
Nevada	—	2019	SB97	^[66]
New York	2014	—	S7048	^[67]
	2015		A5467/S499	^[68]^[69]
	2017		A5001/S50	^[70]^[71]
	—	2019	A2707/S3293	^[72]^[73]
New Jersey	2015	—	A4083	^[74]
	2016		A429	^[75]
	2018	2020	A1796/S2609	^[76]^[77]
Washington, D.C.	2017	—	B22-0102	^[78]
	—	2020	B23-0409	^[79]
Georgia	2018	—	HB931	^[80]
Wisconsin	2019	—	AB436	^[81]
Washington	2019	2020	HB1687	^[82]
Pennsylvania	2020	—	HB2333	^[83]
Colorado	—	2020	SB20-221	^[84]
Texas	2020	—	HB73	^[85]^[86]
Virginia	—	2021	HB2132	^[87]
Maryland	—	2021	HB231	^[88]
Oregon	—	2021	HB3020/SB704	^[89]^[90]
Vermont	—	2021	HB128	^[91]
Florida	2021	—	SB718	^[92]
Iowa	2021	—	HF310	^[93]
New Mexico	2021	—	SB213	^[94]
Minnesota	2021	—	SF360	^[95]
Massachusetts	2021	—	HD2275/SD1183	^[96]^[97]
Nebraska	2021	—	LB321	^[98]
Arkansas	2022	—	LB321
North Carolina	2022	—	LB321
New Hampshire	2021	—	HB238	^[99]
	—	2023	HB315	^[100]^[101]
Delaware		2023	HB142	^[102]^[103]
Michigan	2023		HB4718	^[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

• Homohysteria
• Transgender discrimination
• Transgender Day of Remembrance, a day to memorialize those who have been killed by transphobia

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. Worthen M (2020). Queers, Bis, and Straight Lies: An Intersectional Examination of LGBTQ Stigma. Routledge. ISBN 978-1315280318.
3. 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. Jordan Blair Woods; Brad Sears; Christy Mallory (September 2016). . The Williams Institute - UCLA School of Law. Archived from the original on November 30, 2019.
6. 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. Feminist Analyses of Gendered Representations. Peter Lang. 2009. p. 82. ISBN 978-1433102769.
8. 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. . 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. . 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. "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. 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. "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. 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. Ring, Trudy (June 5, 2019). "Bill in Congress Would Ban Gay, Trans 'Panic' Defenses". The Advocate. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
50. Crittenton, Anya (June 5, 2019). . 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. "Resolution" (PDF). American Bar Association, House of Delegates. August 12–13, 2013. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
60. 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. "SB1761: Criminal Code – Sexual Orientation". Illinois General Assembly. 2017. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
62. "An Act relating to criminal procedure – trials". State of Rhode Island General Assembly. January 3, 2018. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
63. "An Act concerning gay and transgender panic defense" (PDF). Connecticut General Assembly. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
64. "HB711 HD1 SD1: Relating to Criminal Defense". 2019. Retrieved June 1, 2019.
65. "An Act Regarding Criminal Procedure with Respect to Allowable Defenses". Maine Legislature. 2019. Retrieved November 21, 2019.
66. "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. 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). . 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. 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. 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. from the original on June 5, 2018. Retrieved January 14, 2023.
128. 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. 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. 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

• Chen, Christina Pei-Lin (2000). "Provocation's privileged desire: the provocation doctrine, homosexual panic, and the non-violent unwanted sexual advance defense". Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy. 10 (1). ISSN 0010-8847. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
• . Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia: Darwin Community Legal Service. Archived from the original on December 7, 2004. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
• Lee, Cynthia; Kwan, Peter Kar Yu (2014). "The Trans Panic Defense: Heteronormativity, and the Murder of Transgender Women". Hastings Law Journal. 66: 77–132. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2430390.
• McConnell, David (2013). American Honor Killings: Desire and Rage Among Men. Brooklyn, New York: Akashic Books. ISBN 978-1-61775-153-0. Retrieved February 15, 2017.
• "Hatred, Murder and Male Honour" (PDF). Public Safety Canada/Sécurité publique Canada. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
• Suffredini, Kasey. . Archived from the original on March 8, 2021. Retrieved June 2, 2019.
• Woods, Jordan Blair; Sears, Brad; Mallory, Christy. "Model Legislation for Eliminating the Gay and Trans Panic Defenses". The Williams Institute. Retrieved June 2, 2018.

External links

• at Court TV
• "They asked for it", article by Michael Lindenberger in The Advocate
• by the Crown Prosecution Service
• LGBTQ+ "Panic" Defense at the National LGBT Bar Association