Jump to content
Election Results
  • Chemung County Executive Race: Chris Moss (R) 55% Jerome Emanuel (Dem) 29% Krusen (I) 16%
  • 1st District: Pastrick (R) 57% Pucci (Dem) 43%
  • 2nd District: Manchester (R) 69% Saglibene (Con) 30%
  • 3rd District: Sweet (R) 53% Lynch (Dem) 40%
  • 4th District: Brennan (R) 64% Bond (Dem) 35%
  • 5th District: Margeson (R) 64% Stow (Dem) 20% Miller 15% (I)
  • 7th District: Sonsire (Dem) 63% Milliken (R) 36%
  • 8th District: Woodard (R) 58% Callas (Dem) 41%
  • 9th District: Burin (R) 74% Fairchild (I) 25%
  • 12th District: McCarthy (Dem) 50% Collins (R) 45%
  • 13th District: Drake (R) 65% Logan-Lattimore (Dem) 34%
  • 14th District: Smith (R) 68% Heyward (Dem) 31%
Ann

Cuomo’s newest proposal

Recommended Posts

Ann    251

While watching local news this morning one of the segments was about Cuomo’s latest proposal to pass legislation to eliminate “gay panic”  as a defense in a criminal matter.  I believe this would interfere with due process.  It’s not up to him to make that determination but a jury hearing the case.  He’s overstepping his authority yet again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chris    841

I had to look it up to see what it meant.

"The gay panic defense is a legal defense that is sometimes employed, usually against charges of assault or murder. A defendant using the defense claims they acted in a state of violent temporary insanitybecause of unwanted same-sex sexual advances.The defendant alleges to find the same-sex sexual advances so offensive and frightening that it brings on a psychotic state characterized by unusual violence."

Is it really that prevalent as a successful defense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ann    251
2 hours ago, Chris said:

I had to look it up to see what it meant.

"The gay panic defense is a legal defense that is sometimes employed, usually against charges of assault or murder. A defendant using the defense claims they acted in a state of violent temporary insanitybecause of unwanted same-sex sexual advances.The defendant alleges to find the same-sex sexual advances so offensive and frightening that it brings on a psychotic state characterized by unusual violence."

Is it really that prevalent as a successful defense?

I don’t believe it matters whether it’s a successful defense or not, it should be up to a jury to decide, not legislated as to what can and can not be used as a defense.  

What would be next?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×