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

[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

 

[syrenn]

i agree... crime is crime.

 

[asterism]

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?

 

[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

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.

 

[Si modo]

Not a big fan of thought crimes, so this hate crime thing, I find ridiculous.

But, as we do have hate/thought crimes....

I don't know what the hell that guy is saying that it can't be hate if it's lesbain on gay man violence.

Some women, and I suggest all go take a lookie at these three gems, simply hate men.

True story.

 

[asterism]

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 agree, especially the part where lesbians are supposedly immune to "hate crimes" because they beat up a gay man. Plenty of lesbians HATE gay men.

 

[del]

there's plenty of hate to go around, but it's not a crime to hate.

acting on it is another story

 

[asterism]

there's plenty of hate to go around, but it's not a crime to hate.

acting on it is another story

True. But being part of a group doesn't make one immune to hatred either.

 

[del]

not at all. that's the beauty of this case.

it's the iraq-iran war of hate crime

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“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.”

A lawyer who never heard of Wisconsin v. Mitchell (1993), not good.

In Mitchell, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Wisconsin’s hate crime law was Constitutional.

An enhanced sentence may be imposed if an assailant "intentionally selects the person against whom the crime is committed because of the race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry of that person."

Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 47 (1993).

 

[Quantum Windbag]

“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.”

A lawyer who never heard of Wisconsin v. Mitchell (1993), not good.

In Mitchell, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Wisconsin’s hate crime law was Constitutional.

An enhanced sentence may be imposed if an assailant "intentionally selects the person against whom the crime is committed because of the race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry of that person."

Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 47 (1993).

Let me get this straight, these lesbians, who claim not to have known the guy that was attacking them is gay, intentionally got beaten up by him because they were gay so they could use self defense to beat the crap out of him.

Can't see why a jury would have a problem with that logic.

 

[editec]

Maybe the CLASS that the lesbians hate wasn't GAYS it was MEN, eh?

In which case it IS a hate crime ...by GENDER.

duh!

 

[manifold]

“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.”

A lawyer who never heard of Wisconsin v. Mitchell (1993), not good.

In Mitchell, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Wisconsin’s hate crime law was Constitutional.

An enhanced sentence may be imposed if an assailant "intentionally selects the person against whom the crime is committed because of the race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry of that person."

Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 47 (1993).

Hate laws wouldn't be quite so offensive if the "intentionally selects" criteria was in fact a requirement for conviction of a hate crime. Obviously it's not if merely using slurs while committing the crime qualifies it has a hate crime.

 

[Ravi]

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

Too little information to decide, imo.

 

[manifold]

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

Too little information to decide, imo.

Assuming it's the latter, does that mean it can't be a hate crime?

 

[Ravi]

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

Too little information to decide, imo.

Assuming it's the latter, does that mean it can't be a hate crime?

Hating on haters or justifiable assault?

 

[manifold]

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

Too little information to decide, imo.

Assuming it's the latter, does that mean it can't be a hate crime?

Hating on haters or justifiable assault?

I'm pretty sure being insulted is never justification for assault.

If a black guy called an Italian a guinea, and then the wop proceeded to beat him up, calling him a filthy ****** the whole time, would that be hating on a hater or justifiable assault?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Maybe the CLASS that the lesbians hate wasn't GAYS it was MEN, eh?

In which case it IS a hate crime ...by GENDER.

duh!

Which must be why they are being using homophobic language.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

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.

You mean you've never beat someone up out of love?

Agree 100% by the way. Hate Crime laws are STUPID.

 

[Liability]

As a rule, I think it's perfectly ok to hate crime.