Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
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 laws 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, youre 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 doesnt 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
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.
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.
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, youre 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Did they beat him up because he is gay or because he used racial slurs against them?
Too little information to decide, imo.
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...
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?
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?
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...
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 laws 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, youre 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 doesnt 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.
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?
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 laws 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, youre 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 doesnt 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.