New South Wales's "Gay Panic" repeal legislation introduced today
29 replies, posted
[QUOTE]NSW Parliament has just introduced a bill to repeal ‘gay panic’ laws and it is expected to be voted on in the next few days.The bill to amend the Crimes Act (re: provocation) was successfully introduced by Christian Democrats upper house MP Fred Nile today, but debate was adjourned for five calendar days.
NSW Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby policy officer Jed Horner said the bill was expected to “fly through” once parliament voted on it in the coming days.
[U][B]This means the current laws that allows for the use of the ‘gay panic’ defence in a murder trial would no longer be valid.[/B][/U]
It would also mean an accused attempting to downgrade a charge of murder to manslaughter if they can prove they were provoked into a deadly attack because of a non-violent sexual advance would also no longer be valid.
“We finally have official legislation that will get rid of the ‘gay panic’ defence,” Horner told the Star Observer.
Premier Barry O’Farrell had released a draft of the Crimes Amendment (Provocation) Bill 2013 last October after an inquiry by the Legislative Council Select Committee – chaired by Christian Democratic Party leader Fred Nile – recommended in April that the ‘gay panic’ defence be removed.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.starobserver.com.au/news/local-news/new-south-wales-news/nsw-gay-panic-repeal-legislation-introduced-today/119762[/url]
Posted the whole thing because it was short
It's absolutely ridiculous that this was allowed to be law until two-thousand-and-fucking-fourteen.
What the fuck, part of Australia has a law that basically lets anyone murder you for being gay and get away with it?
That's some Saudi Arabia level shit
[QUOTE=Zeke129;44143296]What the fuck, part of Australia has a law that basically lets anyone murder you for being gay and get away with it?
That's some Saudi Arabia level shit[/QUOTE]
The defence was used in New Zealand and the US, seems like the defence can still be used in Queensland and South Australia which is revolting, so I hope this bill also gets introduced up here
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;44143348]The defence was used in New Zealand and the US, seems like the defence can still be used in Queensland and South Australia which is revolting, so I hope this bill also gets introduced up here[/QUOTE]
So while most western nations now consider murdering a gay person for being gay a hate crime, three Australian states consider it a tragic necessity?
Fuck
Literally sounds like a Onion news network story.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;44143372]So while most western nations now consider murdering a gay person for being gay a hate crime, three Australian states consider it a tragic necessity?
Fuck[/QUOTE]
I can't seem to find the defence being used in Queensland or South Australia, so it's a very untouched defence but still leaves it open for anyone to use in a murder case where the person they murdered happens to be homosexual, it's pretty fucking stupid I got to admit I just want them to make that defence void
[QUOTE=Zeke129;44143372]So while most western nations now consider murdering a gay person for being gay a hate crime, three Australian states consider it a tragic necessity?
Fuck[/QUOTE]
It's a stupid law but I don't think any judge would apply it. We have lots of outdated laws that still haven't been repealed; for example there are still laws that involve imperial measurements and pounds and shillings (despite Australia moving to metric decades before any of us here on Facepunch were born, similar with the currency as we moved to the AUD in 1966) and even some which explicitly mention the Naval forces of each state despite the only Navy being in the federal ADF, as it has been for around a century.
Also we got a lot of left over British laws that nobody uses anymore
The fuck is "Gay Panic"
[QUOTE=Whomobile;44143700]The fuck is "Gay Panic"[/QUOTE]
If you murdered somebody because they were homosexual and you were "alerted" to the fact, you can kill them, then in court you can use that defence and get off scot free because it was in your right
[QUOTE=Antdawg;44143485]It's a stupid law but I don't think any judge would apply it. We have lots of outdated laws that still haven't been repealed; for example there are still laws that involve imperial measurements and pounds and shillings (despite Australia moving to metric decades before any of us here on Facepunch were born, similar with the currency as we moved to the AUD in 1966) and even some which explicitly mention the Naval forces of each state despite the only Navy being in the federal ADF, as it has been for around a century.[/QUOTE]
frux's phrasing made me think it's still being used today, if it really is a depreciated law then it's not that big of a deal I guess
What the fuck, I never knew this law existed...
This law has been in many countries, even the United States. It's basically stating that if a gay person makes any movements or gives any hints towards wanting sex/relations with you that you are within your right to use deadly force against him/her. The really ironic part is that the reasoning behind it says that gay people are incapable of self-control and might rape any or everything that might be attractive to them, but the law allows people who would fly into a blind rage and kill someone for thinking they're attractive to get off scott free.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;44143296]What the fuck, part of Australia has a law that basically lets anyone murder you for being gay and get away with it?
That's some Saudi Arabia level shit[/QUOTE]
Not exactly, not at all actually. The idea of the "gay panic" and its lesser known counterpart the "trans panic" defense is that you argue in court that the accused had a temporary psychotic break caused by discovering a victim was gay/trans or perceived homosexual advances. It by no means lets you "get away with it", the statistical odds of the defense actually holding up in court are nil.
In fact to my knowledge I've never heard of this defense resulting in acquittal. Although the idea that perceived sexual advances count as provocation has led to some charges being downgraded.
It is still a pretty dumb argument though, there's pretty much no actual science behind it.
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;44143890]Not exactly, not at all actually. The idea of the "gay panic" and its lesser known counterpart the "trans panic" defense is that you argue in court that the accused had a temporary psychotic break caused by discovering a victim was gay/trans or perceived homosexual advances. It by no means lets you "get away with it", the statistical odds of the defense actually holding up in court are nil.
In fact to my knowledge I've never heard of this defense resulting in acquittal. Although the idea that perceived sexual advances count as provocation has led to some charges being downgraded.
It is still a pretty dumb argument though, there's pretty much no actual science behind it.[/QUOTE]
Getting what should be murder downgraded to manslaughter could result in getting probation for a crime that should warrant jail time
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;44143890]Not exactly, not at all actually. The idea of the "gay panic" and its lesser known counterpart the "trans panic" defense is that you argue in court that the accused had a temporary psychotic break caused by discovering a victim was gay/trans or perceived homosexual advances. It by no means lets you "get away with it", the statistical odds of the defense actually holding up in court are nil.
In fact to my knowledge I've never heard of this defense resulting in acquittal. Although the idea that perceived sexual advances count as provocation has led to some charges being downgraded.
It is still a pretty dumb argument though, there's pretty much no actual science behind it.[/QUOTE]
Downgraded murder to manslaughter opens up the possibility of walking away from court without going to jail and like zeke said even if you go to jail you could get probation, so the defence needs to go
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;44144197]Downgraded murder to manslaughter opens up the possibility of walking away from court without going to jail and like zeke said even if you go to jail you could get probation, so the defence needs to go[/QUOTE]
I'm not denying it needs to go, I'm just saying that pulling this defense didn't just automatically, or even often, acquit you, which is what it sounded like Zeke said.
There was a case recently in the 21st century at least where a guy got his charges downgraded in Queensland by using the gay panic.
The judge wasn't happy about it but couldn't do anything but reduce the sentence iirc.
Asteroidrules is right in what he describes. It's still stupid.
If you make a move on a guy and he kills you then he can say the gay made him freak.
[editline]6th March 2014[/editline]
It's ok though, in Queensland people get bashed all the time for being gay and it never goes to court so the laws don't get that much use.
[QUOTE=gerbe1;44144674]It's ok though, in Queensland people get bashed all the time for being gay and it never goes to court so the laws don't get that much use.[/QUOTE]
Uhhh I don't know where the fuck you live in Queensland, but down in Brisbane and Ipswich, bashing someone purely because they're gay is deeply frowned upon
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;44144695]Uhhh I don't know where the fuck you live in Queensland, but down in Brisbane and Ipswich, bashing someone purely because they're gay is deeply frowned upon[/QUOTE]
I live on the gold coast and several of my friends have been beaten up for it. Mostly in high school.
Also I found the gay panic defense thing, turns out the judge rejected their defense [url]http://m.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/qld-scraps-gay-panic-defence-changes/story-fn3dxiwe-1226427364778[/url]
[editline]6th March 2014[/editline]
You can't know what everyone in Brisbane and Ipswich thinks about it. People who think this stuff is ok or normal do exist. And I guarantee it happens just as often where you live as where I live.
I honestly have not heard of people being bashed for being gay, especially in the state schools because a lot of people are coming out as Lesbian and gay, I know a lot of people here in those schools, it seriously is deeply frowned upon
I'm not sure any judge would agree to 'gay panic' as being a legitimate excuse anymore, and would probably still pin the individual with a similar penalty. It's about time that this was changed though.
But hey, at least progress is being made.
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;44144768]I honestly have not heard of people being bashed for being gay, especially in the state schools because a lot of people are coming out as Lesbian and gay, I know a lot of people here in those schools, it seriously is deeply frowned upon[/QUOTE]
Of course it's frowned upon by wider society, people with the right mentality and with the right group will perfectly ok with the idea though. But people aren't exactly open to talking about this stuff especially when they get beaten up by people they thought were friends. It's assault but they don't report it because "it's not worth it" in their view.
I saw this in the movie Kill Your Darlings, and I was like 'man, that would never happen today'
...oh
Literally the most pointless change. "Gay panic" was never going to succeed in a court. A jury would never have accepted that a non-sexual advance was provocation to a murder.
Anyway, the result of the change is that the provocation has to be an indictable offence, which previously was not required, meaning it was possible for someone to attempt to use that defence (not that it would work in a non backwards state, aka not QLD).
The reason why Fred Nile put this forwards was not because of 'gay panic' though. The Reverend, in the past at least, has not been seemingly very kind towards those that are homosexual.
Yeah, it's probably so he can say "look how much I love gay people, I got rid of this terrible law for them" next time he says something homophobic. Which shouldn't take very long.
[QUOTE=DogGunn;44145878]Literally the most pointless change. "Gay panic" was never going to succeed in a court. A jury would never have accepted that a non-sexual advance was provocation to a murder.
Anyway, the result of the change is that the provocation has to be an indictable offence, which previously was not required, meaning it was possible for someone to attempt to use that defence (not that it would work in a non backwards state, aka not QLD).
The reason why Fred Nile put this forwards was not because of 'gay panic' though. The Reverend, in the past at least, has not been seemingly very kind towards those that are homosexual.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't say it's pointless, even if the proponent is just using it for political point scoring, things like this impact people. It can make people struggling with their sexuality feel better. In fact it does. Since it's so easy to do and it can't hurt, it's not pointless, it's worthwhile given the small amount of effort it takes.
is gay panic like zombie panic source??
[QUOTE=Antlerp;44153142]is gay panic like zombie panic source??[/QUOTE]
Probably, don't you become a zombie if someone kills you in that?
Well some people probably believe that they'll become gay if they are close to a gay person. So yeah, you're right.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.