Lawyer: Lesbians’ assault on gay man can’t be hate crime

[Valerie]

In this case there appears to be no hate crime but that doesn't mean in other cases there mustn't be... I never understood the objection to enhanced prosecutorial discretion in the case of more heinous crimes.

 

[Liability]

Why did the lesbian win the fight with the gay guy?

Because the gay guy hits like a girl.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

In this case there appears to be no hate crime but that doesn't mean in other cases there mustn't be... I never understood the objection to enhanced prosecutorial discretion in the case of more heinous crimes.

ALL crimes are hate crimes.

 

[Dot Com]

I hate the fact that haters hate hate-crime laws.

 

[Sarah G]

Three women identified by their lawyers as lesbians were arraigned yesterday on a hate crime charge for allegedly beating a gay man at the Forest Hills T station in an unusual case that experts say exposes the law’s flawed logic.

“My guess is that no sane jury would convict them under those circumstances, but what this really demonstrates is the idiocy of the hate-crime legislation,” said civil liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate. “If you beat someone up, you’re guilty of assault and battery of a human being. Period. The idea of trying to break down human beings into categories is doomed to failure.”

Prosecutors and the ACLU of Massachusetts said no matter the defendants’ sexual orientation, they can still face the crime of assault and battery with intent to intimidate, which carries up to a 10-year prison sentence, by using hateful language.

“Someone who is Jewish can be anti-Semitic,” said ACLU staff attorney Sarah Wunsch. “The mere fact that someone is a member of the same class doesn’t mean they could not be motivated by hatred for their very own group.”


Lawyer: Lesbians’ assault on gay man can’t be hate crime - BostonHerald.com

This from the article:

Prosecutor Lindsey Weinstein said the two sisters and one of their domestic partners, Lydia Sanford, also a defendant, viciously beat the man Sunday, repeatedly punching and kicking him after he bumped them with his backpack on a stairwell.

She said the victim, who suffered a broken nose, told cops he believed the attack was “motivated as a crime because of his sexual orientation” since the three women “called him insulting homophobic slurs.”

If it's true they were calling him homophobic slurs, it was a hate crime. The lesbians were beating the guy up, for what? He bumped them with his backpack.

What gets into people these days.

 

[Amelia]

Three women identified by their lawyers as lesbians were arraigned yesterday on a hate crime charge for allegedly beating a gay man at the Forest Hills T station in an unusual case that experts say exposes the law’s flawed logic.

“My guess is that no sane jury would convict them under those circumstances, but what this really demonstrates is the idiocy of the hate-crime legislation,” said civil liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate. “If you beat someone up, you’re guilty of assault and battery of a human being. Period. The idea of trying to break down human beings into categories is doomed to failure.”

Prosecutors and the ACLU of Massachusetts said no matter the defendants’ sexual orientation, they can still face the crime of assault and battery with intent to intimidate, which carries up to a 10-year prison sentence, by using hateful language.

“Someone who is Jewish can be anti-Semitic,” said ACLU staff attorney Sarah Wunsch. “The mere fact that someone is a member of the same class doesn’t mean they could not be motivated by hatred for their very own group.”


Lawyer: Lesbians’ assault on gay man can’t be hate crime - BostonHerald.com

Interesting.

What are you applauding Del?

the entire article. it's perfect. this quote sums up my feelings about hate law

“If you beat someone up, you’re guilty of assault and battery of a human being. Period."

i think hate law is anathema to justice.

I disagree. If you throw a rock through a window because you're feeling a little rambunctious that's way different from throwing a rock through a window because you're trying to send a message to and basically scare the shit out of the minority family living in your neighborhood.

The person trying to terrorize a family deserves a much worse penalty than the person doing a dumb prank.

 

[manifold]

Interesting.

What are you applauding Del?

the entire article. it's perfect. this quote sums up my feelings about hate law

“If you beat someone up, you’re guilty of assault and battery of a human being. Period."

i think hate law is anathema to justice.

I disagree. If you throw a rock through a window because you're feeling a little rambunctious that's way different from throwing a rock through a window because you're trying to send a message to and basically scare the shit out of the minority family living in your neighborhood.

The person trying to terrorize a family deserves a much worse penalty than the person doing a dumb prank.

And what if you throw the rock to harass a registered pedophile into moving out of your neighborhood? I'm pretty sure they're not a 'protected' class.

 

[Valerie]

In this case there appears to be no hate crime but that doesn't mean in other cases there mustn't be... I never understood the objection to enhanced prosecutorial discretion in the case of more heinous crimes.

ALL crimes are hate crimes.

A starving desperate man breaks into a grocery store after hours... In a subsequent struggle with a security guard, the thief grabs the guard's gun and turns it on him resulting in the guard's death, as well as the successful theft of goods worth of thousands of dollars. The door, window and counter are damaged and need replacement...


An antisemitic man breaks into a grocery store after hours because the owner is a Jew who just moved into the neighborhood and he wants to steal his goods to wreck his business and send a message he doesn't belong there. In a subsequent struggle with the owner, the thief grabs the owner's gun and turns it on him resulting in the owner's death, as well as the successful theft of goods worth thousands of dollars. The door, window and counter are sprayed with swastikas and need replacement...



Both crimes result in 1 dead man, stolen goods, and property damage. One crime is particularly more heinous which warrants more severe legal consequences... Hate crime laws give prosecutors the ability to protect against any extended harm to the community.

 

[Amelia]

the entire article. it's perfect. this quote sums up my feelings about hate law

“If you beat someone up, you’re guilty of assault and battery of a human being. Period."

i think hate law is anathema to justice.

I disagree. If you throw a rock through a window because you're feeling a little rambunctious that's way different from throwing a rock through a window because you're trying to send a message to and basically scare the shit out of the minority family living in your neighborhood.

The person trying to terrorize a family deserves a much worse penalty than the person doing a dumb prank.

And what if you throw the rock to harass a registered pedophile into moving out of your neighborhood? I'm pretty sure they're not a 'protected' class.

Seriously?

Here's my scale in general terms:

Throwing a rock to terrify someone because of their race/religion/sexuality

> (is worse than)

throwing a rock to terrify an individual you just don't like but it's personal between you and them and they have some warning that they should protect themselves against your crazy @$$

>

throwing a rock to terrify an individual you have something against because of something bad that they did

>

throwing a rock at a window just because it was there.





Intent matters in many different kinds of crimes. There are different degrees of murder and manslaughter, with state of mind taken into account. Why not different degrees of assault or vandalism.

 

[Amelia]

In this case there appears to be no hate crime but that doesn't mean in other cases there mustn't be... I never understood the objection to enhanced prosecutorial discretion in the case of more heinous crimes.

ALL crimes are hate crimes.

A starving desperate man breaks into a grocery store after hours... In a subsequent struggle with a security guard, the thief grabs the guard's gun and turns it on him resulting in the guard's death, as well as the successful theft of goods worth of thousands of dollars. The door, window and counter are damaged and need replacement...


An antisemitic man breaks into a grocery store after hours because the owner is a Jew who just moved into the neighborhood and he wants to steal his goods to wreck his business and send a message he doesn't belong there. In a subsequent struggle with the owner, the thief grabs the owner's gun and turns it on him resulting in the owner's death, as well as the successful theft of goods worth thousands of dollars. The door, window and counter are sprayed with swastikas and need replacement...



Both crimes result in 1 dead man, stolen goods, and property damage. One crime is particularly more heinous which warrants more severe legal consequences... Hate crime laws give prosecutors the ability to protect against any extended harm to the community.

Excellent example!

 

[Liability]

In this case there appears to be no hate crime but that doesn't mean in other cases there mustn't be... I never understood the objection to enhanced prosecutorial discretion in the case of more heinous crimes.

ALL crimes are hate crimes.

A starving desperate man breaks into a grocery store after hours... In a subsequent struggle with a security guard, the thief grabs the guard's gun and turns it on him resulting in the guard's death, as well as the successful theft of goods worth of thousands of dollars. The door, window and counter are damaged and need replacement...


An antisemitic man breaks into a grocery store after hours because the owner is a Jew who just moved into the neighborhood and he wants to steal his goods to wreck his business and send a message he doesn't belong there. In a subsequent struggle with the owner, the thief grabs the owner's gun and turns it on him resulting in the owner's death, as well as the successful theft of goods worth thousands of dollars. The door, window and counter are sprayed with swastikas and need replacement...



Both crimes result in 1 dead man, stolen goods, and property damage. One crime is particularly more heinous which warrants more severe legal consequences... Hate crime laws give prosecutors the ability to protect against any extended harm to the community.

Let us say that in both cases the offender is 30 years old and has two separate prior felony convictions for a violent crimes.

If this happened in NY State, each person would have to get sentenced as a persistent violent felony offender. So for the non-murder felonies, assuming they get convicted of all charges, they would get sentences ending with the phrase " -- to life." For the murder conviction(s), each would get probably a sentence of 25 to life. The sentences MIGHT even run consecutively (i.e., back to back to back).

The small additional time the hate-crime guy might get wouldn't significantly affect his very distant future date possible release to parole. And the hate crime law itself didn't deter his conduct one iota.

Accordingly, it might appear that the entire hoo-ha is just a lot of noise amounting to nothing much of any real consequence.

 

[Zander]

Did they beat him up because he is gay or because he used racial slurs against them?

Too little information to decide, imo.

It doesn't matter. We already have laws against assault. We don't need a special law because the victim is a minority.

 

[Valerie]

Lawyers can yap and press charges and they can try all sorts of cases which articles will be written about... The grounds for prosecution either exist or the charges shouldn't stick.

Only criminals are potentially harmed by prosecutorial discretion to protect the community against more heinous crimes...

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

Lawyers can yap and press charges and they can try all sorts of cases which articles will be written about... The grounds for prosecution either exist or the charges shouldn't stick.

Only criminals are potentially harmed by prosecutorial discretion to protect the community against more heinous crimes...

wrong. Prosecutor discretion can and does sometimes lead to an innocent person being charged with a crime. If that weren't so, we wouldn't need juries. We could just say no innocent person is ever charged with a crime, so if you're charged, you're obviously guilty In fact we could just extend that and say the police don't arrest innocent people. So if you're arrested, go to jail. No need for a trial.

Not that that has anything to do with so called hate crimes. Can you please post an example of a love crime?

 

[Amelia]

Lawyers can yap and press charges and they can try all sorts of cases which articles will be written about... The grounds for prosecution either exist or the charges shouldn't stick.

Only criminals are potentially harmed by prosecutorial discretion to protect the community against more heinous crimes...

wrong. Prosecutor discretion can and does sometimes lead to an innocent person being charged with a crime. If that weren't so, we wouldn't need juries. We could just say no innocent person is ever charged with a crime, so if you're charged, you're obviously guilty In fact we could just extend that and say the police don't arrest innocent people. So if you're arrested, go to jail. No need for a trial.

Not that that has anything to do with so called hate crimes. Can you please post an example of a love crime?

You mean crimes committed by OWS?

 

[Valerie]

Lawyers can yap and press charges and they can try all sorts of cases which articles will be written about... The grounds for prosecution either exist or the charges shouldn't stick.

Only criminals are potentially harmed by prosecutorial discretion to protect the community against more heinous crimes...

wrong. Prosecutor discretion can and does sometimes lead to an innocent person being charged with a [HATE] crime. If that weren't so, we wouldn't need juries. We could just say no innocent person is ever charged with a crime, so if you're charged, you're obviously guilty In fact we could just extend that and say the police don't arrest innocent people. So if you're arrested, go to jail. No need for a trial.

Not that that has anything to do with so called hate crimes. Can you please post an example of a love crime?

Can you please post an example of someone who was charge with a hate crime who was not also charged with some other crime...? One example where the charge of a hate crime was not initiated as a prosecutorial enhancement of other criminal charges?

 

[del]

Lawyers can yap and press charges and they can try all sorts of cases which articles will be written about... The grounds for prosecution either exist or the charges shouldn't stick.

Only criminals are potentially harmed by prosecutorial discretion to protect the community against more heinous crimes...

we've got this thing called presumption of innocence, perhaps you've heard of it?

this is the same line of thinking that says if one has nothing to hide, then increased govt surveillance without a warrant shouldn't bother one.

do you agree with that?

 

[Katzndogz]

Three women identified by their lawyers as lesbians were arraigned yesterday on a hate crime charge for allegedly beating a gay man at the Forest Hills T station in an unusual case that experts say exposes the law’s flawed logic.

“My guess is that no sane jury would convict them under those circumstances, but what this really demonstrates is the idiocy of the hate-crime legislation,” said civil liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate. “If you beat someone up, you’re guilty of assault and battery of a human being. Period. The idea of trying to break down human beings into categories is doomed to failure.”

Prosecutors and the ACLU of Massachusetts said no matter the defendants’ sexual orientation, they can still face the crime of assault and battery with intent to intimidate, which carries up to a 10-year prison sentence, by using hateful language.

“Someone who is Jewish can be anti-Semitic,” said ACLU staff attorney Sarah Wunsch. “The mere fact that someone is a member of the same class doesn’t mean they could not be motivated by hatred for their very own group.”


Lawyer: Lesbians’ assault on gay man can’t be hate crime - BostonHerald.com

This from the article:

Prosecutor Lindsey Weinstein said the two sisters and one of their domestic partners, Lydia Sanford, also a defendant, viciously beat the man Sunday, repeatedly punching and kicking him after he bumped them with his backpack on a stairwell.

She said the victim, who suffered a broken nose, told cops he believed the attack was “motivated as a crime because of his sexual orientation” since the three women “called him insulting homophobic slurs.”

If it's true they were calling him homophobic slurs, it was a hate crime. The lesbians were beating the guy up, for what? He bumped them with his backpack.

What gets into people these days.

Some people anyway. How about killing a baby because a person didn't get the seat she wanted at the baby shower.

Fight at shower cited in slaying of 9-month-old boy | The Detroit News | detroitnews.com

What do all these incidents have in common? Hmmmmmm. Must be something.

 

[Valerie]

Lawyers can yap and press charges and they can try all sorts of cases which articles will be written about... The grounds for prosecution either exist or the charges shouldn't stick.

Only criminals are potentially harmed by prosecutorial discretion to protect the community against more heinous crimes...

we've got this thing called presumption of innocence, perhaps you've heard of it?

this is the same line of thinking that says if one has nothing to hide, then increased govt surveillance without a warrant shouldn't bother one.

do you agree with that?

I disagree that is the same line of thinking... If someone is not already convicted of a crime they do not stand to face any hate crime charges...

 

[del]

Three women identified by their lawyers as lesbians were arraigned yesterday on a hate crime charge for allegedly beating a gay man at the Forest Hills T station in an unusual case that experts say exposes the law’s flawed logic.

“My guess is that no sane jury would convict them under those circumstances, but what this really demonstrates is the idiocy of the hate-crime legislation,” said civil liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate. “If you beat someone up, you’re guilty of assault and battery of a human being. Period. The idea of trying to break down human beings into categories is doomed to failure.”

Prosecutors and the ACLU of Massachusetts said no matter the defendants’ sexual orientation, they can still face the crime of assault and battery with intent to intimidate, which carries up to a 10-year prison sentence, by using hateful language.

“Someone who is Jewish can be anti-Semitic,” said ACLU staff attorney Sarah Wunsch. “The mere fact that someone is a member of the same class doesn’t mean they could not be motivated by hatred for their very own group.”


Lawyer: Lesbians’ assault on gay man can’t be hate crime - BostonHerald.com

This from the article:

Prosecutor Lindsey Weinstein said the two sisters and one of their domestic partners, Lydia Sanford, also a defendant, viciously beat the man Sunday, repeatedly punching and kicking him after he bumped them with his backpack on a stairwell.

She said the victim, who suffered a broken nose, told cops he believed the attack was “motivated as a crime because of his sexual orientation” since the three women “called him insulting homophobic slurs.”

If it's true they were calling him homophobic slurs, it was a hate crime. The lesbians were beating the guy up, for what? He bumped them with his backpack.

What gets into people these days.

Some people anyway. How about killing a baby because a person didn't get the seat she wanted at the baby shower.

Fight at shower cited in slaying of 9-month-old boy | The Detroit News | detroitnews.com

What do all these incidents have in common? Hmmmmmm. Must be something.

um, they all involve black people which allows a racist shitbag like you to crawl out from whatever maggot infested shithole you hang out in and spew some racist bile without actually having the stones to admit it?

hmmm, yeah, i think that's it, you cowardly shitbag