mjec:
Because the government has yet to rectify the “non-violent Homosexual Advance Defence” loophole in murder legislature. Basically, if you make advances upon someone of the same sex, and they don’t like it, the law states that they must be looked upon less harshly if they murder you. All they have to do in court is say, and to a degree, prove that you were trying to pick them up (the law specifically states that they only need be “non-violent advances”) and their murder charge will become manslaughter.
NB: This issue was brought to my attention by this article, which was linked to me from GetUp!’s Twitter feed.
This is not true.
Quick googling will reveal that there was in fact a death, prosecution, sentencing and appeal. However the conviction was for manslaughter and the appeal was on the grounds of undue harshness. The conviction was sound on the basis that there was a brawl that “got out of hand.” While the victim allegedly made sexual advances to the perpetrators, he was not gay, nor was this a factor in sentencing.
There is certainly no defence which allows you to get away with murder because you’re retaliating against a sexual advance - even against a violent sexual advance killing is usually a disproportionate response (and therefore not a defence to murder).
In sentencing (not in deciding whether or not to convict) a judge may take into account mitigating factors, including provocation. Provocation is not specifically defined but can be construed broadly. That is has been construed to include non-violent homosexual sexual advances in the past is probably true, but this does not mean it’s binding. There’s certainly no legislative provision creating a defence as claimed. In addition, that is merely one factor considered in sentencing. If a crime is motivated by hatred for a particular group (for example, a person reacts disproportionately because they are homophobic) that will count against them.
In short: I call bullshit.
In the Queensland Criminal Code, provocation is a legislated, partial defence to murder (also some assault charges, but it’s applied differently) which, if successful, mitigates the conviction to manslaughter.
The case this principle comes from is Green v R (1997) 191 CLR 334.
>They care more about the fucking cattle than the LGBT community. Seriously Julia? Seriously? This is just fucked up
in Queensland. see link. On mobile so can’t reblog properly.
In the Queensland Criminal Code, provocation is a legislated, partial defence to murder (also some assault charges, but...
To be fair, anyone claiming provocation as a defence for murder definitely has to do far, far more than simply proving...
(Some portions of original quote omitted). This is not true. Quick googling will reveal that there was in fact a death,...
Well this is fucked up. I urge all QLD residents to sign this petition.
I wish I could sign this petition, but me no live in Queensland. >.
So now I really don’t like my state.
whaaaaaaat? this is ridiculous!