Good. What’s the difference between “I killed him because he was gay and came on to me” and “I killed him because he was taking surveys and approached me with a clipboard” other than one being “icky?” Because otherwise they’re both just something uncomfortable you either go with or get past and murder is absolutely not justified in any way.
Wait there was a law that allowed you to kill someone if they were gay?
You could use it as a defense after the fact.
WTF that is a shit defense. Did that actually get anyone off? That like pleading insanity.
This gets people off in various states in the U.S. It’s referred to as the “gay panic” defense here.
Absolutely bullshit excuse for people to murder or commit hate crimes.
I’m a straight man and I find it very complimentary when I’ve had gay guys be interested in me. I take that as a compliment that I’m put together and well-groomed.
Didn’t work, but it was the attempted defense in the Matthew Shepherd case.
Interestingly, the killers of Matthew Shepherd have said publically over and over again, they were NOT trying to commit a hate crime and they couldn’t have cared less about Matthew Shepherd’s sexuality. They were “friends” of his who had been totally aware of his sexuality for years. The night they brutally killed him, they went after another person (not homosexual) and beat them up also. I tend to believe they didn’t really target Matthew so much over his sexuality, as much as that he was an easy target because he was a gentle person who wouldn’t fight back when they decided to let out their brutal anger. As a gay person, I appreciate the martyrdom and the forum that Matt Shepherd’s family has provided, but I think we should listen to what a murderer says about their reasons for committing a crime - especially in this case, where it really wasn’t about gay panic at all if the truth be known.
I can’t believe I’d never heard of this case. Granted I was a 14yo British kid when it happened so prob didn’t hit my radar.
Holy fucking Christ this is heart wrenching!!!
Shepard was beaten so brutally that his face was completely covered in blood, except where it had been partially cleansed by his tears.
That poor lad. I hope those fucking bastards rot in jail. 😭
It was the argument their own legal team used, so I’m not going to give them too much benefit of the doubt.
Well I get that - and I don’t think anything can excuse what they did no matter what “reason” they did it.
I think we should listen to what a murderer says about their reasons for committing a crime
Wat
Not get off, but used basically as a temporary insanity plea to get a reduced sentence. It’s basically an admission of guilt to request a lower charge. And yes, the Wiki article cites numerous examples, the most famous one being the guy who killed somebody after finding out on a talk show his friend was gay and has a crush on him. He used the defense and got 2nd-degree murder instead of 1st.
No you couldn’t. You could try, but it never works. Nobody is dumb enough to believe that you killed someone out of gay panic. You killed them because you’re a sick pervert of a monster and looking for some excuse to hurt others. That’s the only truth that really comes out of these proceedings time and time again.
Nope and there never could be, thank God. The “gay panic defense” was just a falsehood, a way to manipulate the truth to make it seem like there was some way to justify being a hateful bigot with no morals or ability to control themselves. And it never worked, it was never a successful defense anyway - thanks to educated people with more intelligence being able to see right through it for the morally corrupt bullshit it really is. Nothing can justify murder or assault, and judges and smart people know that.
Not only a law but a defense strategy in court. Gay Panic and Trans Panic as well.
That has never worked. This is a boogeyman that you see people even in this thread blow up as “literally letting you kill people for being lgbt+!” When that is not the case at all.
I should have been more clear that it was not a valid defense. I agree with what you are saying.
Just curious, while I don’t condone violence is there a difference between this and normal defense?
Like say someone of the same gender tried touching me and was trying to come on to me and wouldn’t stop can I shove them away as I would someone of the opposite gender?
I don’t think shoving someone is going to end up in court unless it’s a super unfortunate situation where you shove someone and they trip and fall and hit their head and die or something.
The article doesn’t go into detail what specifically defendants alleged when invoking the law, but it does say it’s similar to a temporary insanity plea. So “I was so enraged by the fact that a gay came on to me that I killed them”. Which is a little extreme. Imagine every woman that’s ever been hit on by a man they didn’t like just attacking with the intent to kill. Just unreasonable all around to allow that as a defense
The difference is degree of escalation. In your example it’s “I was being sexually assaulted” and in the gay panic defense it’s “I interpreted reasonable but unwanted flirtation as danger and responded with violence.” It’s generally used in situations where as a woman if I attacked a man I’d assume I’m getting arrested.
Now personally I have mixed feelings on banning the defense. It never works and so I think bar associations should condemn it in the same way they should condemn any defense by confessing. But I also do think it should come with additional punishment, not because “how dare you defend yourself like this” but because you’re confessing to it being motivated in bigotry. It’s “it was self defense I swear, what happened was [confession of it being a hate crime]”
Violence can’t be condoned or forgiven. And no gay person is going to try and come onto you and touch you unless you were clear about giving unmistakable signals about wanting that. No gay person would waste their time with someone that they know is not interested in them. And what’s so hard about just saying, “Hey I’m not into that,” if someone DID do that. Why are so many men quick to act out of anger and violence, instead of reason and a little human compassion. It should not be that hard to be civilized and mature people.
Murder or assault is never justified in any way, in my opinion. (NOTE, I did say, My opinion). How can anyone believe that “I killed him because he came onto me” makes any sense or is any way justifiable? Those are actions of a very disturbed angry and hate-filled brain. I know from seven decades of experience that gay men aren’t going to “come on” to you if you aren’t interested in them, they wouldn’t bother. And if they did - what the hell is so damn difficult about just seeing it as a compliment and saying, “I’m not into that.” That’s all it takes to thwart their interest in you, they’re not going to keep pestering you, they wouldn’t waste time or effort.
This is fantastic and should never have been close. People who don’t think this has worked before for murderers obviously haven’t been to a tdor (trans day of remembrance) in November where we list all the trans people that are murdered every year because of them being trans and men freaking out about it and murdering them. Plenty have gotten away with murder using this defense so banning it is amazing.
Great Day in the Morning! Another victory for humanity in every way!! Of course there never was any reasonable “gay or trans” panic defense, its just a manipulation of truth used by utter creeps to try and justify their horrendous and unforgivable crimes. It’s disgusting that the very people “panicking” are the ones creating horror and sickness for everyone else - we all should be panicked about hysterical bigots and their hate-filled angry behaviors. They are the real sickos and haters, the ones who spoil the world. Bigotry is never a sound defense, and it will never save someone’s soul from the condemnation which comes with the act of battery or murder.
One more argument to have protected classes.
