Saturday, March 10, 2007

When should someone disclose?

Gwen felt she was female. The defendants, apparently all heterosexual men, were attracted to her. It is typical for transgender females to date outside the gay community. Gay men, for the most part, are not attracted to females. That is why they are gay. So it is common and usually necessary for transgender females to find their boyfriends in the heterosexual community. Often telling someone that you are transgender will forever change the way they think about you. In the case of a romantic relationship, it could mean breaking up. Very often telling someone means telling everyone in the peer group. This information is so “juicy” that many people can not keep it to themselves. Everyone finds out very quickly. When should a transgender person disclose, if ever, that they are transgender? If they are post operative do they still need too? Should you wait for someone to fall in love with you before you tell them?

Deceit or Authenticity?

Gwen was a pretty, seventeen year old transgender female. She lived that way 24/7 and had been living that way long before meeting the defendants. When the defendants saw her they made assumptions about her anatomy that ultimately turned out to be incorrect. The defense claimed that Gwen deceived them. Was it deceit?

Panic Defense

The heat of passion, manslaughter defense, requires two things. First, the defendant must be provoked by the victim into such a state that they act without reasoning. The second requirement is that a typical member of the community would act similarly. The example given in court was; if a person wearing red were to enter an area control by a gang whose color was blue, and a gang member, in a heat of passion, killed that person it would not be manslaughter. This is because a typical member of the community would not be provoked into a state where they lost control. Yes he was in the heat of passion but was it reasonable to be in that state? The defense was claiming that the typical Alameda County resident could be expected to be in a similar state if they found themselves in that situation. This is sometime known as the "gay panic defense".

Since to reach a verdict all 12 jurist must agree, all that is really needed is one out twelve. That is 8.5%. So would 8.5% of the people of Alameda act that way? The jury in Alameda did not agree with that defense and found the defendants guilty of second degree murder. Unfortunately, the Fresno case was never brought before a jury. Would a typical member of Fresno County acted similar?

Why no hate crime?

None of the four defendants were found guilty of a hate crime. The jury’s decision surprised me. How could this not be a hate crime? One of the jurist explained that they thought the primary reason the defendants acted the way they did was because they were deceived. They thought Gwen had deliberately tricked the defendants into thinking he was a girl. And it was this deceit that they were reacting too not the fact that Gwen was transgender. Unfortunately, not a single time in the 2 trials, 16 weeks of testimony did a single transgender person take the witness stand. Would this have made a difference?