HANDOUT FOR PRESS CONFERENCE
LESBIAN COUPLE SEEKING "OPPOSITE-SEX" MARRIAGE LICENSE
September 6, 2000
CONTACT: Phyllis Randolph Frye, Attorney: email@example.com, 713-723-8368
After reading the accounts in the newspapers and chatting with reporters over the phone for the past week, there are still several points that have been missed or misunderstood.
1. The Wicks' marriage makes no sense unless you understand the decision of the 4th Texas Court of Appeals, Littleton v Prange, 9 S.W.3d 223 and that it was twice appealed to the Texas Supreme Court which refused to hear it both times, and that it awaits action from the U.S. Supreme Court. The 4th Court decision, concurrence and dissent, the second appeal to the Texas Supreme Court and the Writ for Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court can all be found at the web site http://christielee.net. Also at that site are media articles dealing with gender identity being located in the brain, newspaper coverage, other legal arguments and commentary. 99 percent of you questions and research are already answered and available if you will research that web site.
2. Christie Lee Littleton's husband died four years ago, and for the most part, no one cares. She sued as a surviving spouse for medical malpractice. The doctor's insurance company lawyers did not want the evidence of the medical malpractice to ever reach the jury. Accepting their argument that this vaginaed woman, Christie Lee Littleton, was in a same-sex marriage with a penised man, the trial court, the 4th Court of Appeals and the Texas Supreme Court have said that this widow of an almost seven year, happy and fulfilling marriage, has no standing to sue. As to the malpractice allegation, I urge you in the media to dig around and determine how much the husband's mother and how much the husband's children were paid in settlement of the case.
3. Christie Lee Littleton followed all the rules of the State of Texas. Twenty-seven years ago, she was solicited to a state research program, and after six years of extensive testing by state salaried doctors in a state university hospital, her hormones were corrected, her genitals were corrected and her breasts were enhanced, to match what her brain had been telling her since her age of three years that she was a woman and not a man, under that same state program with those same state salaried doctors at that same state university hospital. With no fraud or hiding, she went to court for a legal change of name. With no fraud or hiding, she took that change of name and a letter from her surgeons to the Texas Department of Public Safety and obtained pictured identification that said female. Ten years later, while in Kentucky for surgery that was in follow-up to an automobile accident, she met and fell in love with her future husband, Jonathan Mark Littleton. With no fraud or hiding, she told him of her past, of which he had no problem. Using her Texas DPS identification, she obtained a Kentucky marriage license, listing her as bride, and they were married in Kentucky. He followed her back to San Antonio where they lived happily for almost seven years. During that time, IRS accepted joint tax returns – married filing jointly. During that time, when Jonathan was ill, the Texas Attorney General demanded that as legal spouse, Christie must pay Jonathan's child support via his prior marriage. With no fraud or hiding, Christie was honest about her past to her family, her neighbors and her customers. With no fraud or hiding, she had a Texas Court amend the sex listing on her birth certificate. What more could she do?
4. This was a Kentucky marriage that the Texas courts voided. QUESTION: how many people who have married outside of Texas now live in this state? Are their marriages open to attack when they file for medical malpractice wrongful death as the surviving spouse?
5. The 4th Texas Court of Appeals stated that for the purposes of determining legal sex, genitals do not matter. The 4th Texas Court of Appeals stated that legal sex is determined by chromosomes while citing a 30 year old case from England that is about to be overturned by the English Parliament, and while ignoring the huge advances in medicine during the past 30 years. Then the 4th Texas Court of Appeals voided the amended birth certificate and then presumed Christie's chromosomes from her original birth certificate. They next presumed her deceased husband's chromosomes from a presumption of his original birth certificate. Neither Christie nor her husband were ever tested nor was her husband's birth certificate ever viewed.
6. In all of its presumptions, the 4th Texas Court of Appeals also presumed that sex chromosomes are only XX or XY. They purposefully ignored the effects of their presumptions on the intersexed citizens of Texas and their marriages. Those 20,000 to 800,000 were also ignored by the Texas Supreme Court in its refusal to hear the second appeal.
7. To make a political point, we have never stated and will not state the status of Jessica's genitals or of her surgery. Please understand, since transsexualism became a media issue with the Christine Jorgensen case in the 1950's, TS folks have seen there status related to only one thing: surgery or "the operation." This has caused untold hardship on transsexual people who cannot afford surgery, on transsexual people who have complicated medical problems that make surgery more dangerous, and on transsexual people who after the full time hormonal and name and social gender expression corrections learn for themselves that surgery is not necessary. This is especially hard on the female to male community where surgery is still far from satisfactory and is addressed in more detail in our Writ of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court on the web site. And we must remember that the 4th Texas Court of Appeals ruled that genitals were irrelevant and the Texas Supreme Court twice chose to ignore the debacle. Okay, if genitals are irrelevant, then GENITALS ARE IRRELEVANT. If Jessica were non-op like me or pre-op, she could have gotten her marriage license months ago in Harris County by performing a drop-drawer inspection. Is that want we want in Texas? Do we not only want all couples seeking marriage licenses to complete chromosome tests, but also to go into a little room for a drop-drawer inspection? I do not think Texans will stand for the increased cost of chromosome testing or a drop-drawer inspection to satisfy a bureaucrat in order to get a marriage license. If Jessica is post-op like Christie, then again it does not matter. The 4th Texas Court of Appeals ruled that Christie's 20 year old vagina and her almost seven year vaginal-penile intercourse with her Kentucky married husband were irrelevant and the Texas Supreme Court twice chose to ignore the debacle. GENITALS ARE IRRELEVANT. We will not go into this!
8. Any media that wants to cover the wedding, contact Brian Derrick at 210-241-5991.
If you surfed in from the Internet
directly to this page
and wish to view the entire Christie Lee Littleton website,
Last revised: Thursday, September 07, 2000 06:03 PM
Website design and hosting
courtesy of WomynWeb