Gay panic defense#Australia

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".

{{Main|Homosexual panic}}

Homosexual panic seen as a mental health disorder is distinct from the homosexual panic defense within the legal system. Whereas homosexual panic disorder was at one point considered a diagnosable medical condition, the legal defense implies only a temporary loss of self-control.{{cite web |title=Gay and Trans Panic Defense |url=http://lgbtbar.org/what-we-do/programs/gay-and-trans-panic-defense/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190127005247/https://lgbtbar.org/what-we-do/programs/gay-and-trans-panic-defense/ |archive-date=2019-01-27 |access-date=2020-12-19 |website=The LGBT Bar}}

Edward J. Kempf, a psychiatrist,{{cite news | url=https://www.nytimes.com/1971/12/14/archives/edrdj-kmpf-l-pychia-trit-86-pioneer-in-psychosomici.html | title=Edward J. Kempf, Psychiatrist, 86 | newspaper=The New York Times | date=December 14, 1971 | access-date=July 5, 2022 | archive-date=July 5, 2022 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220705191344/https://www.nytimes.com/1971/12/14/archives/edrdj-kmpf-l-pychia-trit-86-pioneer-in-psychosomici.html | url-status=live }} coined the term "homosexual panic" in 1920. He identified it as a condition of "panic due to the pressure of uncontrollable perverse sexual cravings,"{{cite book |last1=Kempf |first1=Edward |title= Psychopathology |date=1920|pages=477–515 |doi=10.1037/10580-010 |chapter=The psychopathology of the acute homosexual panic. Acute pernicious dissociation neuroses}} and classified it as an acute pernicious dissociative disorder, meaning that it involved a disruption in typical perception and memory functions.{{citation needed|date=December 2020}} Kempf identified the condition during and after World War I at St. Elizabeths Hospital in Washington, D.C.{{cite web |last1=Suffredini |first1=Kasey |title=Pride and Prejudice: The Homosexual Panic Defense |url=https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bctwj/21_2/03_FMS.htm |website=Boston College Law School |publisher=Boston College |access-date=2019-06-02 |archive-date=2021-03-08 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210308090714/https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bctwj/21_2/03_FMS.htm |url-status=dead }}

The disorder was briefly included in DSM-1 as a supplementary term in Appendix C{{cite book |last1=American Psychiatric Association |title=Diagnostic and Statistical Manual |date=1952 |publisher=American Psychiatric Association Mental Hospital Service |location=Washington, D.C. |page=121 |edition=1}} but did not appear in any subsequent editions of DSM and thus is not considered a diagnosable condition by the American Psychiatric Association.{{cite web |title=DSM |url=http://www.psychiatry.org/practice/dsm |website=American Psychiatric Association |access-date=2020-12-19 |archive-date=2015-08-19 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150819083050/http://www.psychiatry.org/practice/dsm |url-status=live }}

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".{{cite journal |last1=Glick |first1=Burton |title=Homosexual Panic: Clinical and Theoretical Considerations |journal=Nervous and Mental Disease |date=1959 |volume=129 |pages=20–8 |pmid=13828460 |doi=10.1097/00005053-195907000-00003|s2cid=615775 }}

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).{{Cite news|url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-01/gay-panic-defence-abolished-by-sa-parliament/12940296|title=South Australia becomes final state to abolish 'gay panic' murder defence|newspaper=ABC News|date=December 1, 2020|via=www.abc.net.au|access-date=2021-08-12|archive-date=2020-12-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201202024328/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-01/gay-panic-defence-abolished-by-sa-parliament/12940296|url-status=live}}{{Cite web|url=https://lgbtqbar.org/programs/advocacy/gay-trans-panic-defense/|title=LGBTQ+ "Panic" Defense|access-date=2023-05-03|archive-date=2023-05-05|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230505210923/https://lgbtqbar.org/programs/advocacy/gay-trans-panic-defense/|url-status=live}} 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.

The defense is commonly defined by the attempt to shift the blame onto the victim's sexual orientation or gender identity of the victim as a form of victim blaming.{{cite web|url=https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/member-features/gay-trans-panic-defense/|title=The Gay/Trans Panic Defense: What It is, and How to End It|date=31 March 2020|access-date=10 October 2024|website=American Bar Association}}{{cite journal|url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0886260517713713|title=The Gay Panic Defense: Legal Defense Strategy or Reinforcement of Homophobia in Court?|date=2020|access-date=10 October 2024|journal=Journal of Interpersonal Violence|volume=35|issue=21–22|doi=10.1177/0886260517713713|last1=Tomei|first1=J.|last2= Cramer|first2=R. J.|last3=Boccaccini|first3=M. T.|last4=Panza|first4=N. R.|pages=4239–4261 |pmid=29294790 |url-access=subscription}}

In Australia, it is known as the "homosexual advance defence" (HAD).{{cite web |url=https://www.justice.nsw.gov.au/justicepolicy/Documents/homosexualadvancedefence1998.doc |title=Homosexual Advance Defence: Final Report of the Working Party |date=September 1998 |access-date=June 1, 2019 |format=DOC |archive-date=April 15, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200415134805/https://www.justice.nsw.gov.au/justicepolicy/Documents/homosexualadvancedefence1998.doc |url-status=live }}{{cite news |newspaper=The Australian |date=October 23, 1995 |title=Gay rally puts 'panic defence' on trial |first=Amanda |last=Meade}} Of the status of the HAD in Australia, Kent Blore wrote in 2012:{{cite journal |title=The Homosexual Advance Defence and the Campaign to Abolish it in Queensland: The Activist's Dilemma and the Politician's Paradox |first=Kent |last=Blore |journal=QUT Law & Justice Journal |volume=12 |number=2 |year=2012 |doi=10.5204/qutlr.v12i2.489 |doi-access=free }}

{{Quote|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).{{cite news |url=https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/gay-panic-laws-pass-queensland-parliament-removing-partial-defence-20170321-gv32j8.html |title=Gay panic laws pass Queensland Parliament, removing partial defence |last=Caldwell |first=Felicity |work=Brisbane Times |date=March 21, 2017 |access-date=March 21, 2017 |archive-date=March 1, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200301164245/https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/gay-panic-laws-pass-queensland-parliament-removing-partial-defence-20170321-gv32j8.html |url-status=live }} 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. 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.{{Cite web|url=https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ca190082/s23.html|title=Crimes Act 1900 – Sect 23 Trial for murder—partial defence of extreme provocation}}

Garry Wait, a 20-year-old waiter, mounted an unsuccessful gay panic defence after being charged with the murder of 63-year-old former federal MP Bill Arthur in 1982. Wait pleaded not guilty to murder but guilty to manslaughter, on the grounds that Arthur had made "homosexual advances". The jury rejected his account of the killing, convicting him of murder. He was subsequently sentenced to life imprisonment.{{cite news|url=https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/116450682|title=Life sentence over death of ex-MP|newspaper=The Canberra Times|date=9 March 1982}}

South Australia was the first Australian jurisdiction to legalize consensual homosexual acts in 1975; however, {{As of|April 2017|lc=y}} it was the only Australian jurisdiction not to have repealed or overhauled the gay panic defense.{{cite web |title=The Provoking Operation of Provocation: Stage 1 |url=https://law.adelaide.edu.au/system/files/media/documents/2019-01/provocation_stage_1_report.pdf |publisher=South Australian Law Reform Institute |access-date=June 1, 2019 |date=April 2017 |archive-date=March 6, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190306200028/https://law.adelaide.edu.au/system/files/media/documents/2019-01/provocation_stage_1_report.pdf |url-status=live }} In 2015, the South Australian state government was awaiting{{cite news |url=https://www.timebase.com.au/news/2017/AT04291-article.html |title=Overview of Homosexual Advance Defence Laws Across Australia: South Australia Still to Enact Change |date=July 5, 2017 |work=Time Base |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=March 20, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200320014753/https://www.timebase.com.au/news/2017/AT04291-article.html |url-status=live }}{{cite news |url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-22/sa-becomes-last-state-to-allow-gay-panic-defence/8376948.html |title=South Australia Becomes Last State to Allow Gay Panic Defence for Murder |last=Jones |first=Ruby |date=March 22, 2017 |work=ABC News |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=March 20, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200320014754/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-22/sa-becomes-last-state-to-allow-gay-panic-defence/8376948.html |url-status=live }} 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.{{cite AustLII|SASCFC|56|2014|litigants=R v Lindsay |date=June 3, 2014 |courtname=Court of Criminal Appeal (SA, Australia)}} 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.{{cite AustLII|HCA|17|2015|litigants=Lindsay v the Queen}}{{cite web |url=http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/publications/judgment-summaries/2015/hca-16-2015-05-06.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150921091316/http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/publications/judgment-summaries/2015/hca-16-2015-05-06.pdf |archive-date=2015-09-21 |url-status=live |title=Lindsay v the Queen |publisher=High Court of Australia |date=May 6, 2015 |access-date=June 1, 2019}} Lindsay was re-tried and was again convicted of murder. The Court of Criminal Appeal upheld the conviction,{{cite AustLII|SASCFC|129|2016|litigants=R v Lindsay |date=December 8, 2016 |courtname=Court of Criminal Appeal (SA, Australia)}} and an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court was dismissed.{{cite AustLII|HCATrans|131|2017|litigants=Lindsay v The Queen |date=June 16, 2017 |courtname=auto}} 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. Finally, in 2020, South Australia abolished the defense of provocation altogether.{{Cite web|url=https://johnstonwithers.com.au/news/south-australia-abolishes-the-defence-of-provocation|title=South Australia abolishes the defence of provocation|first=Johnston|last=Withers|website=Johnston Withers|access-date=2023-05-03|archive-date=2023-05-03|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230503190842/https://johnstonwithers.com.au/news/south-australia-abolishes-the-defence-of-provocation|url-status=live}}

In 2003, a gay interior designer and former television host, David McNee, was killed{{cite news |url=https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=3515038 |title=Homicide detectives continue inquiry into designer's death |publisher=NZ Herald News |date=July 28, 2003 |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=April 1, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190401180641/https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=3515038 |url-status=live }} 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.{{cite news |work=The Dominion Post |date=February 17, 2005 |title=McNee's killer appeals against sentence |page=3 |quote=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.}}{{cite news |work=The Sunday Star-Times |date=July 9, 2006 |title=Move to end provocation defence for gay murders |last=Boland |first=Mary Jane |page=8 |quote='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.'}}

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.{{cite news |url=https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10583823 |title=Gay MP calls for change to law |newspaper=The New Zealand Herald |date=July 10, 2009 |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=April 25, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200425170533/https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10583823 |url-status=live }}{{cite news |url=https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10583689 |title=Gay community calls for justice over banjo killing |newspaper=The New Zealand Herald |date=July 10, 2009 |access-date=June 1, 2019 |first=Andrew |last=Koubaridis |archive-date=April 25, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200425170535/https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10583689 |url-status=live }}

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.{{cite web |url=http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3101491/Parliament-scraps-partial-defence-of-provocation |title=Parliament scraps partial defence of provocation |last=Hartevelt |first=John |date=November 26, 2009 |work=The Press |via=Stuff |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=April 8, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190408052012/http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3101491/Parliament-scraps-partial-defence-of-provocation |url-status=live }}

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.{{Cite web|last=Lendon|first=Brad|date=September 8, 2020|title=US Marine pardoned by Philippines for killing of transgender woman|url=https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/08/asia/us-marine-philippines-transgender-killing-pardon-intl-hnk-scli/index.html|access-date=September 8, 2020|website=CNN |archive-date=September 8, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200908102232/https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/08/asia/us-marine-philippines-transgender-killing-pardon-intl-hnk-scli/index.html|url-status=live}}

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"{{cite news |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/no-portsmouth-defence-father-and-child-let-down-and-others-76917.html |title=No 'Portsmouth defence': Father and child let down and others |type=letters |date=November 6, 2003 |newspaper=The Independent |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=May 27, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200527231423/https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/letters/no-portsmouth-defence-father-and-child-let-down-and-others-76917.html |url-status=live }}{{cite news |title=A Queer Verdict|quote=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. |date=November 25, 1995 |newspaper=The Guardian |page=T14 |first=Kevin |last=Toolis}}{{cite book |title=Prejudice and pride: discrimination against gay people in modern Britain |publisher=Routledge & Kegan Paul |year=1983 |isbn=0-7100-9916-9 |location=London |page=[https://archive.org/details/prejudicepridedi0000gall/page/67 67] |last=Galloway |first=Bruce |url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/prejudicepridedi0000gall/page/67 }} or the "guardsman's defence".{{cite news |title=He was just a poof |date=November 4, 1995 |work=The Daily Telegraph Mirror |first=Peter |last=Lalor}} The latter term was used in a 1980 episode of Rumpole of the Bailey.

In December 2024, the CPS issued updated guidance regarding "deception as to sex" in sexual assault cases.{{cite web |title=Prosecutors publish updated 'deception as to sex' guidance |url=https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/prosecutors-publish-updated-deception-sex-guidance |website=Crown Prosecution Service |access-date=20 December 2024}} The guidance suggests that deception or non-disclosure about one's birth sex could impact consent, and such cases may result in criminal charges.{{Relevance inline|discuss=Not about the gay panic defense. Nothing in the linked source suggest that violence against a gay or trans person is defensible according to the guidance.|date=January 2025}}

In 2018, Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) and Representative Joe Kennedy III (D-MA) introduced S.3188{{USBill|115|S|3188|pipe=S.3188, Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2018}} and H.R.6358,{{USBill|115|HR|6358|pipe=H.R.6358, Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2018}} respectively, which would ban the gay and trans panic defense at the national level. Both bills died in committee.

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).{{USBill|116|S|1721|pipe=S.1721, Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2019}}{{USBill|116|HR|3133|pipe=H.R.3133, Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2019}} 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. 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.{{Cite web|title=Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2019 (2019 – S. 1721)|url=https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/s1721|access-date=September 11, 2021|website=GovTrack.us|language=en|archive-date=September 11, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210911190025/https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/116/s1721|url-status=live}}{{Cite web|title=Gay and Trans Panic Defense Prohibition Act of 2021 (S. 1137)|url=https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/s1137|access-date=September 11, 2021|website=GovTrack.us|language=en|archive-date=September 11, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210911190024/https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/s1137|url-status=live}} It was reintroduced in January 2023.{{Cite web |last=Kane |first=Christopher |date=2023-06-28 |title=Markey, Pappas introduce bill to ban use of the LGBTQ panic defense |url=https://www.washingtonblade.com/2023/06/28/markey-pappas-introduce-bill-to-ban-use-of-the-lgbtq-panic-defense/,%20https://www.washingtonblade.com/2023/06/28/markey-pappas-introduce-bill-to-ban-use-of-the-lgbtq-panic-defense/ |access-date=2023-08-22 |website=Washington Blade |language=en-US}}

File:Gay and trans panic defense bans in the United States.svg

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.{{cite California statute |url=https://clerk.assembly.ca.gov/sites/clerk.assembly.ca.gov/files/archive/Statutes/2006/1755_2006_Volume4.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161221230820/http://clerk.assembly.ca.gov/sites/clerk.assembly.ca.gov/files/archive/Statutes/2006/1755_2006_Volume4.pdf |archive-date=2016-12-21 |url-status=live |year=2006 |chapter=550 |page=4617 |title=The Gwen Araujo Justice for Victims Act |HR=AB 1160 |quote=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] |access-date=June 1, 2019}}{{cite web |url=http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/05-06/bill/asm/ab_1151-1200/ab_1160_bill_20060928_chaptered.html |title=The Gwen Araujo Justice for Victims Act |date=February 22, 2005 |publisher=California Secretary of State |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=February 21, 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180221205428/http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/05-06/bill/asm/ab_1151-1200/ab_1160_bill_20060928_chaptered.html |url-status=live }} {{poemquote|{{pad|1.0em}}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."

:{{pad|1.0em}}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.}} 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.{{cite web |url=http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/resolution_on_gay_panic |title='Gay panic' criminal defense strategies should be curtailed by legislation, ABA House resolves |last=Carter |first=Terry |date=August 12, 2013 |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=April 9, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190409003018/http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/resolution_on_gay_panic/ |url-status=live }}

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.{{cite web |url=https://lgbtbar.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2014/02/Gay-and-Trans-Panic-Defenses-Resolution.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170310222348/http://lgbtbar.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2014/02/Gay-and-Trans-Panic-Defenses-Resolution.pdf |archive-date=2017-03-10 |url-status=live |title=Resolution |date=August 12–13, 2013 |publisher=American Bar Association, House of Delegates |access-date=November 21, 2019}}

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.{{cite news |url=https://www.rawstory.com/2014/10/new-california-law-eliminates-gay-panic-as-a-defense-for-attacks-on-lgbt-people/ |title=New California law eliminates 'gay panic' as a defense for attacks on LGBT people |last=Ferguson |first=David |date=October 1, 2014 |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=May 26, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200526113253/https://www.rawstory.com/2014/10/new-california-law-eliminates-gay-panic-as-a-defense-for-attacks-on-lgbt-people/ |url-status=live }} 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.{{cite California statute|year=2014|chapter=684|HR=AB 2501|url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140AB2501}}{{poemquote|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.}}

In August 2017, Bruce Rauner, Governor of Illinois, signed SB1761,{{cite web |url=http://ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=1761&GAID=14&GA=100&DocTypeID=SB&LegID=104743&SessionID=91 |title=SB1761: Criminal Code – Sexual Orientation |publisher=Illinois General Assembly |date=2017 |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=March 14, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190314102830/http://ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=1761&GAID=14&GA=100&DocTypeID=SB&LegID=104743&SessionID=91 |url-status=live }} banning the gay and trans panic defenses in that state.{{cite news |last=Riley |first=John |title=Illinois governor signs 'gay panic' and trans birth certificate bills into law |url=https://www.metroweekly.com/2017/08/illinois-governor-signs-gay-panic-trans-birth-certificate-bills-law |access-date=June 1, 2019 |newspaper=Metro Weekly |date=August 28, 2017 |archive-date=April 24, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190424160054/https://www.metroweekly.com/2017/08/illinois-governor-signs-gay-panic-trans-birth-certificate-bills-law/ |url-status=live }}

In June 2018, H7066aa and S3014,{{cite web |url=http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText18/HouseText18/H7066aa.htm |title=An Act relating to criminal procedure – trials |date=January 3, 2018 |publisher=State of Rhode Island General Assembly |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=April 1, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190401163057/http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText18/HouseText18/H7066aa.htm |url-status=live }} bills to prohibit the gay and trans panic defense passed the Rhode Island Assembly with overwhelming margins: The House voted 68–2{{cite web |url=https://legiscan.com/RI/bill/H7066/2018 |title=Rhode Island House Bill 7066, Regular Session, 2018 |publisher=LegiScan |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=April 1, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190401175308/https://legiscan.com/RI/bill/H7066/2018 |url-status=live }} and the Senate voice voted 27–0.{{cite web |url=https://legiscan.com/RI/bill/S3014/2018 |title=Rhode Island Senate Bill 3014, Regular Session, 2018 |publisher=LegiScan |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=April 1, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190401164049/https://legiscan.com/RI/bill/S3014/2018 |url-status=live }} The Governor of Rhode Island signed the bill into law a month later in July 2018. The law went into effect immediately.{{cite news |last=Gregg |first=Katherine |title=R.I. House votes to end 'gay or trans panic' defense |url=https://www.providencejournal.com/news/20180522/ri-house-votes-to-end-gay-or-trans-panic-defense |access-date=June 1, 2019 |newspaper=Providence Journal |date=May 22, 2018 |archive-date=April 1, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190401181114/https://www.providencejournal.com/news/20180522/ri-house-votes-to-end-gay-or-trans-panic-defense |url-status=live }}

In 2019, the New York State Legislature once again considered banning the gay panic defense.{{cite news |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/new-york-lawmakers-look-ban-controversial-gay-panic-defense-n962716 |title=New York lawmakers have officially banned 'gay and trans panic defense' in murder cases |last=Avery |first=Dan |date=January 25, 2019 |work=NBC News |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=May 18, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190518222059/https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/new-york-lawmakers-look-ban-controversial-gay-panic-defense-n962716 |url-status=live }} 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).{{cite web |url=https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2019/S3293 |title=Senate Bill S3293 |last=Hoylman |first=Brad |date=2019 |publisher=The New York State Senate |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=June 13, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190613051143/https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2019/s3293 |url-status=live }} On June 30, 2019, the day of the NYC Pride March, Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the ban into law, effective immediately.{{cite news |url=https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/30/us/new-york-cuomo-gay-panic-trans/index.html |title=New York bans gay and trans 'panic' defenses |last1=Joseph |first1=Elizabeth |date=June 30, 2019 |work=CNN |access-date=June 30, 2019 |last2=Croft |first2=Jay |archive-date=July 1, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190701015655/https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/30/us/new-york-cuomo-gay-panic-trans/index.html |url-status=live }}

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.{{cite web |url=https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=HB&billnumber=711&year=2019 |title=HB711 HD1 SD1: Relating to Criminal Defense |date=2019 |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=June 27, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190627102046/https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=HB&billnumber=711&year=2019 |url-status=live }}{{cite web |url=https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2&year=2019 |title=SB2 HD1: Relating to Criminal Defense |date=2019 |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=April 3, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210403193403/https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/Archives/measure_indiv_Archives.aspx?billtype=SB&billnumber=2&year=2019 |url-status=live }}{{cite news |url=https://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/06/26/breaking-news/non-binary-licenses-among-three-lgbtqia-bills-signed/ |title=Gov. Ige signs bill allowing non-binary gender designations on driver's licenses |last=Ladao |first=Mark |date=June 26, 2019 |newspaper=Honolulu Star-Advertiser |access-date=November 21, 2019 |archive-date=February 14, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200214055054/https://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/06/26/breaking-news/non-binary-licenses-among-three-lgbtqia-bills-signed/ |url-status=live }}

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.{{cite web |url=https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/80th2019/Bill/6080/Overview |title=Nevada Senate Bill SB97 |date=2019 |publisher=80th Nevada State Legislature |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=May 24, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190524094720/https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/NELIS/REL/80th2019/Bill/6080/Overview |url-status=live }}{{cite news |url=https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/nevada-bans-gay-panic-defense/ |title=Nevada moves towards banning 'gay panic' defense |date=April 17, 2019 |work=Gay Star News |first=Rik |last=Glauert |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=May 20, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190520204143/https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/nevada-bans-gay-panic-defense/ |url-status=dead }}

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.{{cite web |url=https://cga.ct.gov/2019/cbs/S/pdf/SB-0058.pdf |title=An Act concerning gay and transgender panic defense |publisher=Connecticut General Assembly |access-date=November 21, 2019 |archive-date=October 27, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201027024234/https://www.cga.ct.gov/2019/cbs/S/pdf/SB-0058.pdf |url-status=live }} The law went into effect on October 1, 2019, as per the rules governed under the Constitution of Connecticut.{{cite news |url=https://news.yahoo.com/connecticut-lawmakers-move-ban-gay-213215029.html |title=Connecticut lawmakers move to ban 'gay panic defense' |agency=Associated Press |date=June 4, 2019 |work=Yahoo! News |access-date=November 21, 2019 |archive-date=June 10, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190610052002/https://news.yahoo.com/connecticut-lawmakers-move-ban-gay-213215029.html |url-status=live }}{{cite news |url=https://www.courant.com/politics/capitol-watch/hc-pol-gay-panic-defense-connecticut-20190604-hfyxsjurpzdblmislgnavosnsi-story.html |title=Bill banning gay panic defense gets final passage in the House |last=Altimari |first=Daniela |date=June 4, 2019 |newspaper=Hartford Courant |access-date=November 21, 2019 |archive-date=July 12, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190712161436/https://www.courant.com/politics/capitol-watch/hc-pol-gay-panic-defense-connecticut-20190604-hfyxsjurpzdblmislgnavosnsi-story.html |url-status=live }}

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.{{Cite web|url=https://www.lgbtmap.org//equality-maps/panic_defense_bans|website=Movement Advancement Project |title=Gay/Trans Panic Defense Bans|access-date=2020-05-22|archive-date=2020-05-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200523160816/https://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/panic_defense_bans|url-status=live}}{{cite web |url=http://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?paper=HP1175&SessionID=13 |title=An Act Regarding Criminal Procedure with Respect to Allowable Defenses |date=2019 |publisher=Maine Legislature |access-date=November 21, 2019 |archive-date=May 27, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200527174749/http://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?paper=HP1175&SessionID=13 |url-status=live }}

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.{{cite magazine |url=https://www.advocate.com/crime/2020/1/21/nj-bans-gay-panic-murder-defense-and-not-one-legislator-objects |title=N.J. Bans 'Gay Panic' Murder Defense and Not One Legislator Objects |date=January 21, 2020 |magazine=The Advocate |access-date=January 21, 2020 |archive-date=January 22, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200122001711/https://www.advocate.com/crime/2020/1/21/nj-bans-gay-panic-murder-defense-and-not-one-legislator-objects |url-status=live }}

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.{{cite news|url=https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/washington/articles/2020-03-06/washington-state-bans-gay-panic-defense-of-homicide|title=Washington State Bans 'Gay Panic' Defense of Homicide|date=March 6, 2020|access-date=2020-03-11|archive-date=2020-03-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200307161902/https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/washington/articles/2020-03-06/washington-state-bans-gay-panic-defense-of-homicide|url-status=live}}{{Cite web|url=https://katu.com/news/local/washington-approves-nikki-kuhnhausen-bill-to-ban-gay-panic-defense-of-homicide|title=Washington approves Nikki Kuhnhausen Bill to ban 'gay panic' defense of homicide|agency=Associated Press|date=February 27, 2020|website=KATU|access-date=May 22, 2020|archive-date=June 7, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607211815/https://katu.com/news/local/washington-approves-nikki-kuhnhausen-bill-to-ban-gay-panic-defense-of-homicide|url-status=live}}{{Cite web|url=https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=1687&Year=2019&Initiative=false|title=Washington State Legislature|website=app.leg.wa.gov|access-date=2019-11-21|archive-date=2020-03-22|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200322060531/https://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=1687&Initiative=false&Year=2019|url-status=live}}

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. {{Cite web|last=Burness|first=Alex|date=July 13, 2020|title=Colorado becomes 11th state to ban LGBTQ 'panic defense'|url=https://www.denverpost.com/2020/07/13/colorado-gay-panic-defense-ban/|access-date=August 1, 2020|website=The Denver Post|language=en-US|archive-date=August 9, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200809204931/https://www.denverpost.com/2020/07/13/colorado-gay-panic-defense-ban/|url-status=live}}

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.{{Cite web|date=December 16, 2020|title=D.C. Council approves bill banning LGBTQ panic defense|url=https://www.washingtonblade.com/2020/12/16/d-c-council-approves-bill-banning-lgbtq-panic-defense/|access-date=December 20, 2020|website=Washington Blade|language=en-US|archive-date=December 19, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201219074825/https://www.washingtonblade.com/2020/12/16/d-c-council-approves-bill-banning-lgbtq-panic-defense/|url-status=live}}

As of January 2021, similar bills have been introduced in several other states.{{cite news |url=https://www.advocate.com/politics/2019/6/05/bill-congress-would-ban-gay-trans-panic-defenses |title=Bill in Congress Would Ban Gay, Trans 'Panic' Defenses |last=Ring |first=Trudy |date=June 5, 2019 |work=The Advocate |access-date=November 21, 2019 |archive-date=January 21, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200121064525/https://www.advocate.com/politics/2019/6/05/bill-congress-would-ban-gay-trans-panic-defenses |url-status=live }}{{cite news |url=https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/democrats-ban-gay-trans-panic-defense/ |title=Democrats are hoping to ban the gay and trans panic defense – again |last=Crittenton |first=Anya |date=June 5, 2019 |work=Gay Star News |access-date=November 21, 2019 |archive-date=July 30, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190730064805/https://www.gaystarnews.com/article/democrats-ban-gay-trans-panic-defense/ |url-status=dead }}{{which|date=February 2021}}

In 2023, New Hampshire enacted HB 315, sponsored by Rep. Shaun Filiault.{{Cite web |last=Green |first=Rick |date=2023-08-09 |title=After long journey, governor signs Filiault's bill banning gay-panic defense |url=https://www.sentinelsource.com/news/local/statehouse/after-long-journey-governor-signs-filiaults-bill-banning-gay-panic-defense/article_b7368fc6-3fed-517a-9657-6f560e801886.html |access-date=2024-06-07 |website=The Keene Sentinel |location=Keene, New Hampshire |language=en |archive-date=2024-01-27 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240127025717/https://www.sentinelsource.com/news/local/statehouse/after-long-journey-governor-signs-filiaults-bill-banning-gay-panic-defense/article_b7368fc6-3fed-517a-9657-6f560e801886.html |url-status=live }} The state officially became the first Republican-controlled state to abolish the gay and trans panic defense, and went into effect on midnight January 1, 2024.{{Cite web |last=mnemec |date=2023-08-18 |title=History Made in New Hampshire – LGBTQ+ 'Panic' Defense Banned |url=https://lgbtqbar.org/bar-news/history-made-in-new-hampshire-lgbtq-panic-defense-banned/ |access-date=2024-06-07 |publisher=The National LGBTQ+ Bar Association |language=en-US |archive-date=2024-01-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240110194344/https://lgbtqbar.org/bar-news/history-made-in-new-hampshire-lgbtq-panic-defense-banned/ |url-status=live }}

Effective from August 1, 2024, Minnesota implemented a law explicitly banning the gay and trans panic defense within an omnibus justice bill passed and signed into law in May 2024.{{cite web | url=https://www.losangelesblade.com/2024/05/28/minnesota-bans-gay-trans-panic-defense/ | title=Minnesota bans Gay & Trans Panic Defense | date=28 May 2024 | access-date=22 June 2024 | archive-date=6 June 2024 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240606042429/https://www.losangelesblade.com/2024/05/28/minnesota-bans-gay-trans-panic-defense/ | url-status=live }}

The Michigan legislature passed a ban on the use of the gay and trans panic defense on June 27, 2024. The bill was signed into law by Governor Gretchen Whitmer on July 23, 2024.{{cite web|url=https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/07/michigan-gov-gretchen-whitmer-signs-bill-banning-gay-or-trans-panic-defense/|title=Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signs bill banning 'gay or trans panic' defense|date=24 July 2024|access-date=24 July 2024|website=LGBTQ Nation}}

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.{{cite journal |url=https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1796&context=faculty_publications |title=The Gay Panic Defense |last=Lee |first=Cynthia |date=2008 |journal=UC Davis Law Review |volume=42 |pages=471–566 |access-date=June 1, 2019 |archive-date=June 21, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190621184318/https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1796&context=faculty_publications |url-status=live }} 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.

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.{{cite journal |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272428333 |title=Excusing Murder? Conservative Jurors' Acceptance of the Gay-panic defense |last1=Salerno |first1=Jessica M. |last2=Najdowski |first2=Cynthia J. |last3=Harrington |first3=Evan |last4=Kemner |first4=Gretchen |last5=Dave |first5=Reetu |date=February 2015 |access-date=June 1, 2019 |quote=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). |journal=Psychology, Public Policy, and Law |volume=21 |number=1 |pages=24–34 |doi=10.1037/law0000024 |s2cid=145623462 |archive-date=April 3, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210403184624/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272428333_Excusing_Murder_Conservative_Jurors%27_Acceptance_of_the_Gay-Panic_Defense |url-status=live }}

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.{{cite web|url=http://www.nytimes.com/1999/03/30/us/national-news-briefs-jury-selection-begins-in-jenny-jones-lawsuit.html|title=National News Briefs; Jury Selection Begins In 'Jenny Jones' Lawsuit|date=March 30, 1999|website=The New York Times|language=en-US|access-date=January 14, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170911041806/http://www.nytimes.com/1999/03/30/us/national-news-briefs-jury-selection-begins-in-jenny-jones-lawsuit.html|archive-date=September 11, 2017|url-status=live}} 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.{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/12/gay-panic-defence-tactic-ban-court|title=After decades of 'gay panic defence' in court, US states slowly begin to ban tactic|last=Dart|first=Tom|date=May 12, 2018|website=The Guardian|language=en-US|access-date=January 14, 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180605192052/https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/12/gay-panic-defence-tactic-ban-court|archive-date=June 5, 2018|url-status=live}}

{{see also|Rape by deception#Transgender individuals}}

• In the 1997 murder of Chanelle Pickett, William C. Palmer claimed that he attacked Pickett after discovering she "was actually a man". However, when the victim's sister and other witnesses revealed that Palmer was aware of Pickett's trans status, Palmer abandoned this defense.{{cite news |last1=Doherty |first1=William F. |title=Witness says accused killer knew beforehand transsexual was male |url=https://bostonglobe.newspapers.com/newspage/441073249/ |access-date=28 July 2024 |work=The Boston Globe |date=23 April 1997}}
• 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{{'"}}.{{cite journal |last=Bettcher |first=Talia Mae |title=Evil Deceivers and Make-Believers: On Transphobic Violence and the Politics of Illusion |journal=Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy |date=2007 |volume=22 |issue=3 |page=44 |doi=10.1111/j.1527-2001.2007.tb01090.x|s2cid=18183513 }} 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{{'"}}. 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.{{cite web |url=https://www.ebar.com/news///236272 |title=Two murder convictions in Araujo case |last=Szymanski |first=Zak |date=September 15, 2005 |website=Bay Area Reporter |access-date=June 2, 2019 |archive-date=May 29, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200529210300/https://www.ebar.com/news///236272 |url-status=live }}
• 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,{{cite news |url=https://www.denverpost.com/2008/09/18/smile-called-provoking-act-in-transgender-case/ |title=Smile called 'provoking act' in transgender case |last=Whaley |first=Monte |date=September 18, 2008 |newspaper=The Denver Post |access-date=June 2, 2019 |archive-date=April 7, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190407153558/https://www.denverpost.com/2008/09/18/smile-called-provoking-act-in-transgender-case/ |url-status=live }} 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.{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/us/23transgend.html |title=Murder and Hate Verdict in Transgender Case |last=Frosch |first=Dan |date=April 22, 2009 |newspaper=The New York Times |access-date=June 2, 2019 |archive-date=April 1, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190401183313/https://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/us/23transgend.html |url-status=live }}
• Islan Nettles was beaten to death in Harlem just after midnight on August 17, 2013.{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/09/nyregion/embarking-on-a-new-life-transgender-woman-has-it-brutally-taken.html |title=Embarking on a New Life, Transgender Woman Has It Brutally Taken |last=Schwirtz |first=Michael |date=September 8, 2013 |newspaper=The New York Times |access-date=June 2, 2019 |archive-date=June 20, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190620094056/https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/09/nyregion/embarking-on-a-new-life-transgender-woman-has-it-brutally-taken.html |url-status=live }} 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.{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/02/nyregion/mans-confession-in-transgender-womans-death-is-admissible-judge-rules.html |title=Man's Confession in Transgender Woman's Death Is Admissible, Judge Rules |last=McKinley |first=James C. Jr. |date=April 2, 2016 |newspaper=The New York Times |access-date=June 2, 2019 |archive-date=May 15, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190515185610/https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/02/nyregion/mans-confession-in-transgender-womans-death-is-admissible-judge-rules.html |url-status=live }} Dixon pleaded not guilty to first-degree manslaughter at his indictment.{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/04/nyregion/manslaughter-charges-in-beating-death-of-transgender-woman-in-2013.html |title=Manslaughter Charges in Beating Death of Transgender Woman in 2013 |last=McKinley |first=James C. Jr. |date=March 3, 2015 |newspaper=The New York Times |access-date=June 2, 2019 |archive-date=October 31, 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181031052852/https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/04/nyregion/manslaughter-charges-in-beating-death-of-transgender-woman-in-2013.html |url-status=live }} Dixon was not charged with murder, which would have required proof of intent, nor was he charged with a hate crime. 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. Dixon pleaded guilty and received a sentence of 12 years' imprisonment, a sentence that Nettles' mother felt was too lenient.{{cite news |title=Man Sentenced to 12 Years in Beating Death of Transgender Woman |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/20/nyregion/man-sentenced-to-12-years-in-beating-death-of-transgender-woman.html |last=McKinley |first=James C. Jr. |date=April 19, 2016 |newspaper=The New York Times |access-date=June 2, 2019 |archive-date=June 19, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190619000653/https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/20/nyregion/man-sentenced-to-12-years-in-beating-death-of-transgender-woman.html |url-status=live }}

• {{Anl|Crime of passion}}
• Homohysteria
• Transgender discrimination
• Transgender Day of Remembrance, a day to memorialize those who have been killed by transphobia

{{reflist|colwidth=30em}}

• {{cite journal |url=http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cjlpp/vol10/iss1/8 |last=Chen |first=Christina Pei-Lin |date=2000 |title=Provocation's privileged desire: the provocation doctrine, homosexual panic, and the non-violent unwanted sexual advance defense |journal=Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy |volume=10 |issue=1 |access-date=June 2, 2019 |issn=0010-8847}}
• {{cite web |title=Equality Before the Law |url=http://www.dcls.org.au/HomosexualPanicDefence.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20041207091110/http://www.dcls.org.au/HomosexualPanicDefence.htm |archive-date=December 7, 2004 |publisher=Darwin Community Legal Service |location=Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia |access-date=June 2, 2019}}
• {{cite journal |last1=Lee |first1=Cynthia |last2=Kwan |first2=Peter Kar Yu |title=The Trans Panic Defense: Heteronormativity, and the Murder of Transgender Women |journal=Hastings Law Journal |date=2014 |volume=66 |pages=77–132 |doi=10.2139/ssrn.2430390|url=https://scholarship.law.gwu.edu/faculty_publications/1124 |url-access=subscription }}
• {{cite book |last=McConnell |first=David |date=2013 |url=http://www.davidmcconnell.com/american_honor_killings_114524.htm |title=American Honor Killings: Desire and Rage Among Men |publisher=Akashic Books |location=Brooklyn, New York |isbn=978-1-61775-153-0 |access-date=February 15, 2017 |archive-date=October 23, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201023172804/http://www.davidmcconnell.com/american_honor_killings_114524.htm |url-status=dead }}
• {{cite web |title=Hatred, Murder and Male Honour |url=https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/lbrr/archives/cnmcs-plcng/cn89190039-eng.pdf |publisher=Public Safety Canada/Sécurité publique Canada |access-date=June 2, 2019}}
• {{cite web |last=Suffredini |first=Kasey |title=Pride and Prejudice: The Homosexual Panic Defense |url=https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bctwj/21_2/03_FMS.htm |access-date=June 2, 2019 |archive-date=March 8, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210308090714/https://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/schools/law/lawreviews/journals/bctwj/21_2/03_FMS.htm |url-status=dead }}
• {{cite web |last1=Woods |first1=Jordan Blair |last2=Sears|first2=Brad|last3=Mallory|first3=Christy|title=Model Legislation for Eliminating the Gay and Trans Panic Defenses|url=https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/model-leg-gay-trans-panic/|publisher=The Williams Institute|access-date=June 2, 2018}}

• [https://web.archive.org/web/20080205180344/http://www.courttv.com/archive/trials/mckinney/gay_panic_ruling_ctv.html Text of the "Gay Panic" Defense ruling in the Matthew Shepard Murder Trial] at Court TV
• [https://books.google.com/books?id=mGMEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA34 "They asked for it"], article by Michael Lindenberger in The Advocate
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20060304165352/http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecution/hmpbcpol.html Guidance on Prosecuting Cases of Homophobic Crime] by the Crown Prosecution Service
• [https://lgbtbar.org/programs/advocacy/gay-trans-panic-defense/ LGBTQ+ "Panic" Defense] at the National LGBT Bar Association

{{LGBTQ}}

Category:Criminal defenses

Category:Honor killing

Category:LGBTQ and society

Category:LGBTQ-related legislation

Category:Social phenomena

Category:Violence against LGBTQ people

Category:Violence against gay men

Category:Homophobia