Hate crime lawsuits

OP
S

Sky Dancer

Rookie
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
19,307
Reaction score
1,319
Points
0
ColorLines is reporting that hate crime victim James Craig Anderson's partner of 17 years will not be allowed to participate in the civil lawsuit that Anderson's family has brought against the seven white teens who participated in his murder. The state of Mississippi will not allow James Bradfield, Anderson's male partner of 17 years, to be part of the family's civil suit because same-sex partners in Mississippi have no claim in civil actions like the one the family is putting forward.

Hate Crime Victim's Partner Banned From Lawsuit
 
OP
S

Sky Dancer

Rookie
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
19,307
Reaction score
1,319
Points
0
Jordan Gruver was 16 years old in 2006 when he was severely beaten by several KKK members who thought he was an illegal immigrant.

Gruver, an American citizen of Panamanian and Native-American descent, suffered a broken jaw, bruised ribs and permanent nerve damage in his arm because of the hate crime.

The Southern Poverty Law Center sued the country’s second-largest Klan group on behalf of the teen. The Klansmen who beat Gruver were convicted and they severed two years in prison. Edwards represented himself and denied the charges, saying the group is not generally violent.

Last week a jury ordered Imperial Klans of America “grand wizard” Ron Edwards and two former “lieutenants” to pay Gruever $1.5 million for lost wages and medical expenses and for Edwards to pay him $1 million in punitive damages.
Teen Beats KKK in Hate Crime Lawsuit, Awarded $2.5 Million | Total Injury | Blog
 

yidnar

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2011
Messages
12,273
Reaction score
4,764
Points
315
Location
Inside your head.
where was the outcry from the left wing Shitters whe Reginald Denny was beaten half to death ??? and the attackers danced out of the court room free !!!:doubt:
 
OP
S

Sky Dancer

Rookie
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
19,307
Reaction score
1,319
Points
0
CHICAGO – The Chicago Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Inc. and Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, today filed a hate crime lawsuit on behalf of the family of Antwana Muhammad against three men who allegedly perpetrated a racially motivated campaign of harassment against them from September 2006 through October 2010. The Muhammad family, which is African-American, filed the suit in Cook County Circuit Court against David Belardo, Daniel Hilbert, and Steven Schultz.

According to the complaint, four years of harassment against the family culminated on March 26, 2010 when Belardo, Hilbert, and Schultz spray-painted racial epithets, including “******” and “KKK” on the Muhammads’ garage in a successful effort to intimidate and terrorize them, causing them to suffer great emotional stress and damages. The lawsuit seeks compensatory damages for violation of civil rights and emotional distress, as well as punitive damages.

Belardo, Hilbert, and Schultz were criminally charged for this act. Belardo pled guilty to a hate crime, while Hilbert and Schultz each pled guilty to criminal defacement of the Muhammads’ and other neighbors’ property.

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP | News & Publications | Southwest Side Chicago Family Files Hate Crime Lawsuit
 

Tank

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
18,809
Reaction score
2,628
Points
280
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-D5d10JRk4]Black man convicted of hate crime for specifically targeting elderly women - YouTube[/ame]
 

Katzndogz

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
65,656
Reaction score
7,474
Points
1,830

Tank

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
18,809
Reaction score
2,628
Points
280
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIT7Xk5uc5U]91 year old WW2 Vet beaten by black man - YouTube[/ame]
 

LAfrique

VIP Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
1,416
Reaction score
69
Points
83
ColorLines is reporting that hate crime victim James Craig Anderson's partner of 17 years will not be allowed to participate in the civil lawsuit that Anderson's family has brought against the seven white teens who participated in his murder. The state of Mississippi will not allow James Bradfield, Anderson's male partner of 17 years, to be part of the family's civil suit because same-sex partners in Mississippi have no claim in civil actions like the one the family is putting forward.

Hate Crime Victim's Partner Banned From Lawsuit

What is your contention? Mississippi does not recognize same sex marriage. States have the freedom to accept or reject certain practices. I live in Lone Star where the State recognizes and honors "common law" marriages. Meaning a woman does not have to be legal wife to claim rights to about half of live-in lover's assets.
 
OP
S

Sky Dancer

Rookie
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
19,307
Reaction score
1,319
Points
0
ColorLines is reporting that hate crime victim James Craig Anderson's partner of 17 years will not be allowed to participate in the civil lawsuit that Anderson's family has brought against the seven white teens who participated in his murder. The state of Mississippi will not allow James Bradfield, Anderson's male partner of 17 years, to be part of the family's civil suit because same-sex partners in Mississippi have no claim in civil actions like the one the family is putting forward.

Hate Crime Victim's Partner Banned From Lawsuit

What is your contention? Mississippi does not recognize same sex marriage. States have the freedom to accept or reject certain practices. I live in Lone Star where the State recognizes and honors "common law" marriages. Meaning a woman does not have to be legal wife to claim rights to about half of live-in lover's assets.
My contention is that James Bradfield, Anderson partner who was legally barred from marrying him, is as much or more, Anderson's family than his blood relatives. This is patently unfair that he cannot be included in this wrongful death suit.

Charlene Strong, was not recognized by the hospital in Seattle as her partner of ten years lay dying. She was not considered next of kind to make medical decisions. Later, while she was paying for her partners funeral arrangments, the funeral director refused to look at her and directed all the questions and explanations to her partners mother.

I just want people to know what it means for gay couples when we are unable by law to marry.
 
Last edited:

Tank

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
18,809
Reaction score
2,628
Points
280
They don't have to be married, they could have made each other their power of attorney
 

Tank

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
18,809
Reaction score
2,628
Points
280
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HWWnQXiXRs]66 Year Old Man Gets Sucker Punched - YouTube[/ame]
 

LAfrique

VIP Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
1,416
Reaction score
69
Points
83
ColorLines is reporting that hate crime victim James Craig Anderson's partner of 17 years will not be allowed to participate in the civil lawsuit that Anderson's family has brought against the seven white teens who participated in his murder. The state of Mississippi will not allow James Bradfield, Anderson's male partner of 17 years, to be part of the family's civil suit because same-sex partners in Mississippi have no claim in civil actions like the one the family is putting forward.

Hate Crime Victim's Partner Banned From Lawsuit

What is your contention? Mississippi does not recognize same sex marriage. States have the freedom to accept or reject certain practices. I live in Lone Star where the State recognizes and honors "common law" marriages. Meaning a woman does not have to be legal wife to claim rights to about half of live-in lover's assets.
My contention is that James Bradfield, Anderson partner who was legally barred from marrying him, is as much or more, Anderson's family than his blood relatives. This is patently unfair that he cannot be included in this wrongful death suit.

Charlene Strong, was not recognized by the hospital in Seattle as her partner of ten years lay dying. She was not considered next of kind to make medical decisions. Later, while she was paying for her partners funeral arrangments, the funeral director refused to look at her and directed all the questions and explanations to her partners mother.

I just want people to know what it means for gay couples when we are unable by law to marry.

Sky Dancer, while I am a strong supporter of the freedom to be, I am however of the belief that marriage was meant to be between a man and a woman. Thus, I would advice James Bradfield to spend his energy in any necessary legal research to speed the Anderson case than waste time whining about not being co-plaintiff in the case.

And as per any possible will: If Anderson truly wanted Bradfield to have certain things belonging to Anderson, then Anderson would have given to Bradfield or make Bradfield the beneficiary of those desired things.
 
OP
S

Sky Dancer

Rookie
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
19,307
Reaction score
1,319
Points
0
What is your contention? Mississippi does not recognize same sex marriage. States have the freedom to accept or reject certain practices. I live in Lone Star where the State recognizes and honors "common law" marriages. Meaning a woman does not have to be legal wife to claim rights to about half of live-in lover's assets.
My contention is that James Bradfield, Anderson partner who was legally barred from marrying him, is as much or more, Anderson's family than his blood relatives. This is patently unfair that he cannot be included in this wrongful death suit.

Charlene Strong, was not recognized by the hospital in Seattle as her partner of ten years lay dying. She was not considered next of kind to make medical decisions. Later, while she was paying for her partners funeral arrangments, the funeral director refused to look at her and directed all the questions and explanations to her partners mother.

I just want people to know what it means for gay couples when we are unable by law to marry.

Sky Dancer, while I am a strong supporter of the freedom to be, I am however of the belief that marriage was meant to be between a man and a woman. Thus, I would advice James Bradfield to spend his energy in any necessary legal research to speed the Anderson case than waste time whining about not being co-plaintiff in the case.

And as per any possible will: If Anderson truly wanted Bradfield to have certain things belonging to Anderson, then Anderson would have given to Bradfield or make Bradfield the beneficiary of those desired things.
I understand your position. You don't understand the complexity of legal work that a gay couple has to do without a marriage license. That's the reason I'm in favor of marriage equality.

James Bradfield was as much a spouse of Anderson as he was allowed by law to be. He should be included as family.

It's funny how every issue of civil rights the opponents call "whining".
 
OP
S

Sky Dancer

Rookie
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
19,307
Reaction score
1,319
Points
0
They don't have to be married, they could have made each other their power of attorney
Power of attorney is not enough. Marriage confers 1138 rights and priveleges that gay citizens should have equal access to. We can't, because in most states we are unable to legally marry. Power of attorney doesn't make anyone "next of kin".
 
Last edited:

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
56,530
Reaction score
14,223
Points
2,180
Location
In a Republic, actually
What is your contention? Mississippi does not recognize same sex marriage. States have the freedom to accept or reject certain practices. I live in Lone Star where the State recognizes and honors "common law" marriages. Meaning a woman does not have to be legal wife to claim rights to about half of live-in lover's assets.
The contention is that states may accept or reject certain practices provided the process making that determination comports with the rule of law and the 14th Amendment.

Opposition to same-sex marriage does not.

As Theodore B. Olson, co-counsel in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, correctly notes:

“Separate is not equal. Civil unions and domestic partnerships are not the same as marriage. We’re not inventing any new right, or creating a new right, or asking the courts to recognize a new right. The Supreme Court has said over and over and over again that marriage is a fundamental right, and although our opponents say, ‘Well, that’s always been involving a man and a woman,’ when the Supreme Court has talked about it they’ve said it’s an associational right, it’s a liberty right, it’s a privacy right, and it’s an expression of your identity, which is all wrapped up in the Constitution.”

Gay marriage, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, and the Supreme Court : The New Yorker
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top