(2) Sufficient provocation to support or of does not exist if the “sudden quarrel” “heat passion” actions are related to discovery of, knowledge about, or the potential disclosure of defendant’s the association with a person or group with one or more of the characteristics, or victim’s perceived characteristics, in paragraph (1). (3) For the purposes of this sex, and includes a gender identity section, “gender” means person’s and gender-related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the assigned sex at birth. person’s sexual orientation or gender identity does not trigger in another person a medical An individual’s or psychological panic, does not constitute legally adequate provocation, and does not make a person more threatening. LGBT people should be able to live without fear that being honest about their sexual orientation or gender identity would provide a socially sanctioned excuse or justification for violence. Accordingly, courts and legislatures should affirmatively act (1) to ensure that juries are aware of the possibility that subconscious or overt bias or prejudice may cloud their judgment and (2) to limit the use of gay or trans panic arguments as a basis for provocation in non-capital cases. Respectfully submitted, William Shepherd, Chair Criminal Justice Section August 2013 GENERAL INFORMATION FORM Submitting Entity: Criminal Justice Section Submitted By: William Shepherd, Chair Summary of Resolution(s). This resolution urges legislative action to curtail the availability and effectiveness of the and defenses including requiring courts instruct the jury not to let “gay panic” “trans panic” – the sexual orientation or gender identity of the victims, witnesses, or defendants, bias the that neither a non-violent sexual advance, nor the discovery of a jury’s decision, specifying sex or gender identity, constitutes legally adequate provocation to mitigate the person’s severity of any non-capital case.
(2) Sufficient provocation to support “sudden quarrel” or “heat of passion” does not exist if the defendant’s actions are related to discovery of, knowledge about, or the potential disclosure of the victim’s association with a person or group with one or more of the characteristics, or perceived characteristics, in paragraph (1). (3) For the purposes of this section, “gender” means sex, and includes a person’s gender identity and gender-related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person’s assigned sex at birth. An individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity does not trigger in another person a medical or psychological panic, does not constitute legally adequate provocation, and does not make a person more threatening. LGBT people should be able to live without fear that being honest about their sexual orientation or gender identity would provide a socially sanctioned excuse or justification for violence. Accordingly, courts and legislatures should affirmatively act (1) to ensure that juries are aware of the possibility that subconscious or overt bias or prejudice may cloud their judgment and (2) to limit the use of gay or trans panic arguments as a basis for provocation in non-capital cases. Respectfully submitted, William Shepherd, Chair Criminal Justice Section August 2013 GENERAL INFORMATION FORM Submitting Entity: Criminal Justice Section Submitted By: William Shepherd, Chair Summary of Resolution(s). This resolution urges legislative action to curtail the availability and effectiveness of the “gay panic” and “trans panic” defenses – including requiring courts instruct the jury not to let the sexual orientation or gender identity of the victims, witnesses, or defendants, bias the jury’s decision, specifying that neither a non-violent sexual advance, nor the discovery of a person’s sex or gender identity, constitutes legally adequate provocation to mitigate the severity of any non-capital case.
1373479339_31_1_1_9_resolution_summary.authcheckdam.docx