Hate crime?

[Mr. President]

You could claim it but the chances of it standing are slim to none. It would depend on the physical surroundings

Actually its a pretty good defense. Its a defense cops use all the time. And yes it depends on the physical surroundings, as WELL as other evidence to what the defendant is thinking.

It is based on what the defendant was thinking. Do they use evidence from the real world to infer what the defendant was thinking? Yes. Of course. But the actual justification is what was in his mind.

I dont have to be trained in law to comprehend it. You seem to not understand the legality being open for interpretation by a jury of peers.

The legality isn't open for interpretation. Juries don't get to interpret law. Thats the job for the judge. Don't pretend you know shit when you don't. Your not trained in law, thats fine, but don't go around making all these assertions when you don't know fuck all about what you are talking about.

You freakin retard. If there is no real world evidence there is NO EVIDENCE. The Jury can not interpret the law but they can interpret testimony and do and the interpretation of the testimony in conjunction with the law will lead them to their decision.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Legally, he may not have been. But testimony of the perpetrator is that when he learned that the victim was a man, that enraged him.

But that, strictly speaking, isn't a crime of gender bias, as defined by the hate crimes legislation, is it?

Boy are you stupid.

 

[Nik]

Actually its a pretty good defense. Its a defense cops use all the time. And yes it depends on the physical surroundings, as WELL as other evidence to what the defendant is thinking.

It is based on what the defendant was thinking. Do they use evidence from the real world to infer what the defendant was thinking? Yes. Of course. But the actual justification is what was in his mind.

The legality isn't open for interpretation. Juries don't get to interpret law. Thats the job for the judge. Don't pretend you know shit when you don't. Your not trained in law, thats fine, but don't go around making all these assertions when you don't know fuck all about what you are talking about.

You freakin retard. If there is no real world evidence there is NO EVIDENCE.

No shit sherlock. But the evidence isn't the crime. The crime (or justification for a crime) is the persons THOUGHTS.

Surely even you can understand the difference between what makes something a crime, and what makes something evidence. Its not a crime to hold a gun, but finding ones fingerprints on a gun could well be evidence. I can't make it any simpler for you.

The Jury can not interpret the law but they can interpret testimony and do and the interpretation of the testimony in conjunction with the law will lead them to their decision.

I see you've done some research and backtracked your asinine assertion that juries interpret law. Yes, you are right that juries interpret testimony and decide the facts of the case. One of the facts they decide can be, depending on the case, the thoughts/mindset/mental state of individuals. Then they use the law to figure out what said mental states mean.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Sky brought up Mr. Corrales's murder as evidence of ongoing hate crimes. It's Sky's job to prove that it WAS, in fact, a hate crime. It's not my job to support Sky's case for her, though when she makes it this easy, it is kind of fun.

I gave you plenty to go on. Feel free to use google.


As opposed to Nik and Sky, I use actual FACTS in my posts, enough so that someone can do a google and fact check me.

Perhaps Sky should consider checking her facts BEFORE posting.

Thanks for playing, though.

Bias oriented violence. I provided evidence of that. Get a clue. It was one crime listed among many on the SPLC website. Educate yourself.


Ruben Solario was arrested on May 23, 2007, as the result of an anonymous tip10), and booked in Yuma County Jail on one count of second degree murder in Corrales' death.11) Solario had prior brushes with the law, including bein convicted of assault three times, disorderly conduct twice, criminal damages twice, and human smuggling once. He was also accused of domestic violence three times.

Follow-up investigations revealed that Solorio had confessed to family members soon after the murder how he had killed Corrales. Solorio fled to Mexico on he night of the murder and remained there for three months. Court records indicate that Solorio was not under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and investigators said it was not known whther Solorio an dCorrales knew each other. Investigators also said it was not known if Corrales and Solorio knew each other, but believe they did not, and that they did not have evidence to show Corrales' murder was a hate crime.

On May 31, 2007, a grand jury indicted charges of manslaughter and abandoning a body.14)
http://www.lgbthatecrimes.org/doku.php/amancio-corrales

As usual, catz uses the nitpick logical fallacy.

 

[catzmeow]

Thats why he wasn't charged under it. And why they tried to create it after he died.

Get it yet?

Wrong. he wouldn't have been charged under it, anyway, because it would not have applied to his case.

There was no intent to attack a gay man purely for being gay. That's what separates a hate crime from the murder of Mr. Corrales, which was a crime of passion (manslaughter).

Here's the link since you appear to have difficulty finding facts.

I hold out no hopes for you practicing law anytime soon based upon your mad research skillz.

Man pleads guilty to attempted manslaughter of Amancio Corrales | amancio, attempted, corrales - News - YumaSun

 

[catzmeow]

Boy are you stupid.

I'm not the one who posted a case that was not a hate crime to bolster why we need hate crimes legislation.



Man pleads guilty to attempted manslaughter of Amancio Corrales | amancio, attempted, corrales - News - YumaSun

 

[catzmeow]

[
Bias oriented violence. I provided evidence of that. Get a clue. It was one crime listed among many on the SPLC website. Educate yourself.

Except that SPLC identified it as a hate crime in 2005, BEFORE A SUSPECT OR MOTIVE WAS EVEN IDENTIFIED.

 

[Sky Dancer]

[
Bias oriented violence. I provided evidence of that. Get a clue. It was one crime listed among many on the SPLC website. Educate yourself.

Except that SPLC identified it as a hate crime in 2005, BEFORE A SUSPECT OR MOTIVE WAS EVEN IDENTIFIED.

This was a crime of violence and bias played a role. The court did not have enough evidence to call it a hate crime.

Do you think the victim died because the perpetrator loved transvestites?

 

[catzmeow]

Investigators also said it was not known if Corrales and Solorio knew each other, but believe they did not, and that they did not have evidence to show Corrales' murder was a hate crime.

YOu posted this case as evidence of an ongoing hate crime problem. Except--it wasn't a hate crime. Nor would it have been prosecuted as a hate crime under the proposed Matthew Shepard legislation.

The Corrales case is a great example of why this legislation is full of holes in practice. It sounds great in theory, and it makes fuzzy heads like Sky feel safer, but in practice, it doesn't work.

Tell me, Sky. Why should the man who killed Corrales serve less time than someone who murders a gay man in a "hate crime"?

 

[Sky Dancer]

Boy are you stupid.

I'm not the one who posted a case that was not a hate crime to bolster why we need hate crimes legislation.



Man pleads guilty to attempted manslaughter of Amancio Corrales | amancio, attempted, corrales - News - YumaSun

This was a bias crime. Get over yourself. Anyone with half an ounce of human decency can see the obvious.

 

[catzmeow]

This was a crime of violence and bias played a role. The court did not have enough evidence to call it a hate crime.

Do you think the victim died because the perpetrator loved transvestites?

NO. The victim died because he misrepresented himself to the perpetrator as a female. I'm not justifying the murderer, I find an 8 year sentence for this crime to be an egregious offense against justice, but the fact remains that the perpetrator in this instance DID NOT SET OUT TO MURDER A GAY MAN in May, 2005. He set out to pick up a woman.

This crime could not have been prosecuted as a hate crime EVEN UNDER THE MATTHEW SHEPARD legislation. But it sure as hell was a crime of hate and passion, wasn't it?

And yet, that didn't stop you from posting it as evidence that hate crimes legislation is needed, did it?

Even though this case wouldn't even qualify for that kind of prosecution.

THis is a great example of your sloppy thinking, posting, and evidence gathering.

It's also a great example of the sloppy way in which crimes may be misidentified as hate crimes by SPLC and others who have a strong desire to SEE HATE CRIMES whenever there is a gay/lesbian victim.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Investigators also said it was not known if Corrales and Solorio knew each other, but believe they did not, and that they did not have evidence to show Corrales' murder was a hate crime.

YOu posted this case as evidence of an ongoing hate crime problem. Except--it wasn't a hate crime. Nor would it have been prosecuted as a hate crime under the proposed Matthew Shepard legislation.

The Corrales case is a great example of why this legislation is full of holes in practice. It sounds great in theory, and it makes fuzzy heads like Sky feel safer, but in practice, it doesn't work.

Tell me, Sky. Why should the man who killed Corrales serve less time than someone who murders a gay man in a "hate crime"?

The court ruled it was NOT a hate crime. That doesn't mean that hatred toward transvestites was not a factor. It means the prosectutor did not present enough evidence for the court to technically call this a hate crime.

I'm crystal clear on where I stand and where you stand on this issue. No fuzzy headedness at all. Keep ignoring the other evidence, it speaks volumes. Stick your head in the sand and pretend there are no hate crimes.

Say it often.

 

[catzmeow]

This was a bias crime. Get over yourself. Anyone with half an ounce of human decency can see the obvious.

No, it was a crime of passion, no different than a rape or any other violent act between heterosexuals.

If it were a crime of bias, it would have started out with the perpetrator LOOKING TO COMMIT AN OFFENSE SIMPLY BECAUSE THE VICTIM WAS GAY.

That is a hate crime, a crime committed with the motive of attacking a specific group. But, that wasn't this perpetrator's motive.

YOU POSTED MISINFORMATION.

 

[Nik]

Thats why he wasn't charged under it. And why they tried to create it after he died.

Get it yet?

Wrong. he wouldn't have been charged under it, anyway, because it would not have applied to his case.

Oy. No, apparently you don't get it.

There was no intent to attack a gay man purely for being gay. That's what separates a hate crime from the murder of Mr. Corrales, which was a crime of passion (manslaughter).

Here's the link since you appear to have difficulty finding facts.

I hold out no hopes for you practicing law anytime soon based upon your mad research skillz.

Man pleads guilty to attempted manslaughter of Amancio Corrales | amancio, attempted, corrales - News - YumaSun

Wow. You asserted that things were in fact true, when all your link says it that things seem to be unclear.

We decide between guilty and not guilty, not guilty and innocent. Its unclear why he killed Amancio.

And finding things you haven't looked for is necessary to be a good lawyer? Well thats an odd talent to have.

 

[Sky Dancer]

This was a crime of violence and bias played a role. The court did not have enough evidence to call it a hate crime.

Do you think the victim died because the perpetrator loved transvestites?

NO. The victim died because he misrepresented himself to the perpetrator as a female. I'm not justifying the murderer, I find an 8 year sentence for this crime to be an egregious offense against justice, but the fact remains that the perpetrator in this instance DID NOT SET OUT TO MURDER A GAY MAN in May, 2005. He set out to pick up a woman.

This crime could not have been prosecuted as a hate crime EVEN UNDER THE MATTHEW SHEPARD legislation. But it sure as hell was a crime of hate and passion, wasn't it?

And yet, that didn't stop you from posting it as evidence that hate crimes legislation is needed, did it?

Even though this case wouldn't even qualify for that kind of prosecution.

THis is a great example of your sloppy thinking, posting, and evidence gathering.

It's also a great example of the sloppy way in which crimes may be misidentified as hate crimes by SPLC and others who have a strong desire to SEE HATE CRIMES whenever there is a gay/lesbian victim.

Oh dear, he 'misrepresented himself as a female' and that's why he died. He died for crossing dressing. He died for being a transvestite-he may have been someone who wanted to be transsexual.

Is killing transsexuals and transvestites because of who they are not hate crime? That's debateable.

 

[catzmeow]

Stick your head in the sand and pretend there are no hate crimes.

Strawman. I never pretended there were no hate crimes. However, I see no reason why a perpetrator who sets out to kill a gay man, and the murderer of Mr. Corrales should be treated differently for murdering gay men.

The victims are both still dead. It causes massive trauma to the community. The effects are IDENTICAL.

Furthermore, the Corrales case shows how quick some communities are to rush to judgement that a case is a hate crime, when there is NO EVIDENCE for this....years before a suspect is arrested, years before a case goes to court, years before motive is established in the case.

They rush to judgement because they are operating off of a preconceived notion that gays/lesbians are the unwitting victims of heteros.

Mr. Corrales was NOT a hate crime victim, but that didn't stop thousands of people from using his name to further their agenda.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Thats why he wasn't charged under it. And why they tried to create it after he died.

Get it yet?

Wrong. he wouldn't have been charged under it, anyway, because it would not have applied to his case.

Oy. No, apparently you don't get it.

There was no intent to attack a gay man purely for being gay. That's what separates a hate crime from the murder of Mr. Corrales, which was a crime of passion (manslaughter).

Here's the link since you appear to have difficulty finding facts.

I hold out no hopes for you practicing law anytime soon based upon your mad research skillz.

Man pleads guilty to attempted manslaughter of Amancio Corrales | amancio, attempted, corrales - News - YumaSun

Wow. You asserted that things were in fact true, when all your link says it that things seem to be unclear.

We decide between guilty and not guilty, not guilty and innocent. Its unclear why he killed Amancio.

And finding things you haven't looked for is necessary to be a good lawyer? Well thats an odd talent to have.

This gal catz never actually says what her LE job is, yet pretends to be a know-it-all for LE. I suspect she's a dispatcher or LE secretary and cop wannabe. Just because she does it with cops doesn't make her an LE 'expert'.

 

[Nik]

This was a crime of violence and bias played a role. The court did not have enough evidence to call it a hate crime.

Do you think the victim died because the perpetrator loved transvestites?

NO. The victim died because he misrepresented himself to the perpetrator as a female. I'm not justifying the murderer, I find an 8 year sentence for this crime to be an egregious offense against justice, but the fact remains that the perpetrator in this instance DID NOT SET OUT TO MURDER A GAY MAN in May, 2005. He set out to pick up a woman.

Really? It doesn't say that in the link you posted. It doesn't say that he killed Amancio because he misrepresented himself.

This crime could not have been prosecuted as a hate crime EVEN UNDER THE MATTHEW SHEPARD legislation. But it sure as hell was a crime of hate and passion, wasn't it?

Actually we don't know what it was. Facts seem to have been thin, which is why he got off on a plea deal.

And yet, that didn't stop you from posting it as evidence that hate crimes legislation is needed, did it?

Even though this case wouldn't even qualify for that kind of prosecution.

THis is a great example of your sloppy thinking, posting, and evidence gathering.

It's also a great example of the sloppy way in which crimes may be misidentified as hate crimes by SPLC and others who have a strong desire to SEE HATE CRIMES whenever there is a gay/lesbian victim.

Well it can contrast your strong desire to not see a hate crime, no matter the facts.

Care to take umbrage with Sky's other posts? Maybe want to comment on the lesbian who was gang raped? Or the people who spray painted "fags"? Think those were just crimes of passion too?

 

[catzmeow]

Oh dear, he 'misrepresented himself as a female' and that's why he died. He died for crossing dressing. He died for being a transvestite-he may have been someone who wanted to be transsexual.

Is killing transsexuals and transvestites because of who they are not hate crime? That's debateable.

Actually, he died because he knowingly solicited a straight hetero man without giving him the crucial information that he had a penis under his dress.

Does that mean that the straight man shouldn't be charged with murder? NO. I will not make that claim, ever. And I think an 8 year sentence is rather horrifying given the brutality of the crime.

But that straight man would never have attacked Mr. Corrales if Mr. Corrales had not solicited him.

Why exactly WOULD a transvestite man solicit a straight man, pretending to be female? What could possibly be his goal?

 

[Nik]

Stick your head in the sand and pretend there are no hate crimes.

Strawman. I never pretended there were no hate crimes. However, I see no reason why a perpetrator who sets out to kill a gay man, and the murderer of Mr. Corrales should be treated differently for murdering gay men.

The victims are both still dead. It causes massive trauma to the community. The effects are IDENTICAL.

Furthermore, the Corrales case shows how quick some communities are to rush to judgement that a case is a hate crime, when there is NO EVIDENCE for this....years before a suspect is arrested, years before a case goes to court, years before motive is established in the case.

They rush to judgement because they are operating off of a preconceived notion that gays/lesbians are the unwitting victims of heteros.

Mr. Corrales was NOT a hate crime victim, but that didn't stop thousands of people from using his name to further their agenda.

Actually you don't know that he wasn't. And yet thats not stopping you from using his name for your agenda.