Is This A Hate Crime Or Not?

g under p

MEGAN WILLIAMS: They were torturing me. They all passed a knife around that was -- and stabbing me. I was trying to get away as they were stabbing me, and they were holding me down and stuff. And they smothered me with a bag. That morning, I had a bag wrapped around my neck and everything. They choked me. They made me eat dog poop, rat poop and human. They made me drink their urine. And each time, they braided some switches together, and they were beating me across the back. They tore my clothes off me and everything.

And then they took me up to a lake. They said that was the place they were going to cut my throat and throw me in, and I was never going to come back and see my family again. They were just telling me that they were going to kill me.

And, you know, I was -- they made me take a bath in a trash can. They wouldn’t let me use the bathroom. I had to use the bathroom outside. I had to sleep outside. And they told me if they even remotely heard me once, that they would go out there and kill me. They poured candle wax in my hair. They pulled my hair out when they were cutting it with scissors. And, you know, they were just scary.

They had me tied up. I couldn’t go anywhere. Like the time when they left, they were going to go get some beer and stuff, and when they came back they said they were going to finish me off. And before they even got back, I had already got loose. I found a knife and cut myself loose.

I heard the police coming up to the driveway. When I’d seen the police, I just -- you know, I knew it was, you know, my chance to get out. And if I didn’t, I was going to die anyway. And then, that’s when they see me coming out there, and they thought -- they said I was going to lose my leg, when they see about the stabs. And I was scared. I didn’t know what to do. All I kept saying -- I was thinking about my momma, also wanting to come home. And every time I close my eyes, all I see is that knife, the one they kept stabbing me and stabbing me. It’s just -- you know, it’s a nightmare.

This was on Democracy Now today.....Simple question here should these men and women be charged with a hate crime?

Charging them is one thing proving and convicting them would be another.

Also, if this crime was reversed (woman white, those charged black) would those charged, would they be charged with a hate crime?

Here's the full story where you can Watch/listen/Read @ Hate Crimes -- Symbolic and Violent -- on Rise Across U.S.

Peace

Ahnimus

Depends on the motive. If the motive was, "she is a black person" then yes, if it was "let's kidnap and murder a random person" then no.

But with this kind of violent crime, it shouldn't matter what the motive was.

Wether the crooks were acting on a prejudice obtained through cultural institutionalization or pure psychopathy, the punishment should be the same. If the goal of the criminal justice system was treatment, then it might matter, but it doesn't.

810wmb

i don't believe in hate crimes.

it gives whomever the crime was committed against elevated status.

we're all equal right?

just because someone is gay or black etc, it doesn't matter. we are all human.

if you let the punishment fit the crime, all is good.

isn't all crime like the above a "hate crime"???????

we are as a country are so worried about the reason someone would do something, fuck that.

if it's wrong, it's wrong

JD Sal

810wmb wrote:

i don't believe in hate crimes.

it gives whomever the crime was committed against elevated status.

Why?

just because someone is gay or black etc, it doesn't matter. we are all human.

Hate crimes are different because they are not just directed at an individual but are meant to cause fear and intimidation in an entire group or class of people.

You don't see things like cross burnings to drive white families from neighborhoods. We are all human, but all humans don't treat each other the same.

if you let the punishment fit the crime, all is good.

isn't all crime like the above a "hate crime"???????

we are as a country are so worried about the reason someone would do something, fuck that.

if it's wrong, it's wrong

Hate crimes cause greater individual and societal harm.

In Wisconsin v. Mitchell, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously found that "bias-motivated crimes are more likely to provoke retaliatory crimes, inflict distinct emotional harms on their victims, and incite community unrest.... The State's desire to redress these perceived harms provides an adequate explanation for its penalty-enhancement provision over and above mere disagreement with offenders' beliefs or biases"

mammasan

810wmb wrote:

i don't believe in hate crimes.

it gives whomever the crime was committed against elevated status.

we're all equal right?

just because someone is gay or black etc, it doesn't matter. we are all human.

if you let the punishment fit the crime, all is good.

isn't all crime like the above a "hate crime"???????

we are as a country are so worried about the reason someone would do something, fuck that.

if it's wrong, it's wrong

DAmn I finally agree with you on something. I always hated that label "Hate Crime". All crimes are pretty much hate crimes and just because a white male attacks a black male instead of another white male the punishement shouldn't be more severe, or vice versa. The punishment should be based on the act not who the act was purpotrated by or against.

810wmb

that still doesn't mean i believe in them.

by definition they always been here.

PaperPlates

All crimes of this nature involve or require some kind of hate. "Hate-crime" is just a catch phrase to help demonize vicious criminals in a society thats so blase about "normal crime"

g under p

810wmb wrote:

i don't believe in hate crimes.

it gives whomever the crime was committed against elevated status.

we're all equal right?

just because someone is gay or black etc, it doesn't matter. we are all human.

if you let the punishment fit the crime, all is good.

isn't all crime like the above a "hate crime"???????

we are as a country are so worried about the reason someone would do something, fuck that.

if it's wrong, it's wrong

I hear and I understand what your saying. As I was listening this morning on DN they seem to be saying that hate/violent crimes are on the rise especially against blacks. With that the standards according to the interview they seems to be a not enough charges being given when blacks are the victim and too much when they're the accused.

AMY GOODMAN: Malik Shabazz, you spoke with the US attorney in the area, Charles Miller?

MALIK SHABAZZ: Yes.

AMY GOODMAN: What did he say?

MALIK SHABAZZ: He gave a lot of excuses of why hate -- federal hate crime charges, or what’s called conspiracy against constitutional rights, had not been filed in the Megan Williams case. He claims he tried, but he was being rebuffed by the Bush-led US Department of Justice Civil Rights Division. I can believe him on that point.

The United States Department of Justice -- we commonly refer to it as the United States Department of Injustice -- it vigorously attacks the civil liberties, civil rights, the human rights of those that they suspect of so-called terrorism. It advocates the wiretapping of private citizens, the intrusion of bank accounts. It advocates violating the rights of prisoners abroad and at home under the guise of fighting terrorism.

But when terrorism comes against our people here, and it’s continuously occurring, as in the case of Megan Williams and other cases, the United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division has its hands tied. They won’t do anything. And they simply don’t care. So, yes, it’s coming out of Washington. I lay the responsibility on the President of the United States, George Bush, and his politically motivated United States Department of Justice, which simply does not care about our people and our rights and our calls for justice.

They also speak of this case...

AMY GOODMAN: Luz Marquez is the associate director of the National Organization of Sisters of Color Ending Sexual Assault, also known as SCESA. She was at the march in Charleston, met with Megan Williams, also helped organize a national campaign to draw attention to both Megan Williams, as well as other cases of assault against women of color: the campaign called Document the Silence. Luz Marquez joins us on the phone from Troy, New York.

Welcome, Luz. Can you talk about this case and others you see are not getting the kind of attention they need?

LUZ MARQUEZ: Sure, sure. Good morning, Amy. Good morning, Brother Malik. Yes, there are several other cases that we are following. And I should tell you, sort of looking at a historical view of what happens to women of color when they’re violated sexually or victims of domestic violence in this country, there seems to be a discrepancy in the response by both law enforcement, media, as well as community support. And so, the callout that we did in West Virginia was successful, in that folks are no longer afraid or think that talking about sexual assault is taboo, that we need to talk about it to put an end to it.

But I do want to draw attention to Florida, as well as New Jersey. Florida, in the West Palm Beach area of what’s called Dunbar Village apartments, there have been, since June 18 of 2007, this year, there have been five rapes. The worst was of a Haitian woman and her son, who for three hours were raped and sexually assaulted by a gang.

Since that case has happened, we have seen little to no media attention of the issue of rape in hate crimes, as well as failure to protect. I think with all of these cases, what we see is there is a failure to protect, whether it be from the housing authority or from law enforcement, and what have you.

Since the rape of this Haitian woman and her child, who I should say they received torture and just unbelievable assault, there have been three other rapes of a fifteen-year-old in the middle of a day, of a forty-two-year-old just early in the evening, and then in New Jersey, very much similar to the Jena Six case, there were seven women of color lesbians who were walking in what they presumed to be a safe haven in the West Village of New York, a for-LGBT community. They were stopped and sexually harassed by a stand-byer who proceeded to tell them exactly what he was going to do to them sexually, how he was going to do it. He proceeded to follow them. They ignored him. They told him to stop, go away. He then proceeded to tell them specifically every detail of what he would do and then proceeded to touch one of them in her buttocks. And when she went to stop him, a fight brawled out.

And needless to say, four of these seven women are serving time in Bedford Women’s Correctional Facility in Upstate New York, which is a shame, because they were defending themselves. And so, what we see at the National Organization of Sisters of Color Ending Sexual Assault is a huge disparity amongst what happens when a woman of color is violated, whether or not she protects yourself, what happens, and an equal-to protection on behalf of folks who are supposed to protect them.

Peace

JD Sal

mammasan wrote:

DAmn I finally agree with you on something. I always hated that label "Hate Crime". All crimes are pretty much hate crimes and just because a white male attacks a black male instead of another white male the punishement shouldn't be more severe, or vice versa. The punishment should be based on the act not who the act was purpotrated by or against.

But you're looking at just the crime itself, not the repercussions. When hate crimes are commited, the chances for retaliatory crimes are greater. Look at the LA riots after the Rodney King beating. You don't think that society can suffer from the disempowerment of a group of people?

810wmb

mammasan wrote:

DAmn I finally agree with you on something. I always hated that label "Hate Crime". All crimes are pretty much hate crimes and just because a white male attacks a black male instead of another white male the punishement shouldn't be more severe, or vice versa. The punishment should be based on the act not who the act was purpotrated by or against.

shit we agree on all kinds of stuff!!!!!!!

i just doesn't come out looking that way...hehehehehe

soulsinging

JD Sal wrote:

Hate crimes are different because they are not just directed at an individual but are meant to cause fear and intimidation in an entire group or class of people.

this is true. if you murder someone it is murder. if you murder based on prejudice, it is a murder and a threat against all people of the prejudiced group. criminal intimidation if you will. it also increases the likelihood of recidivism. a murder of passion is unlikely to be repeated. a murder becos you think group X doesn't deserve to live indicates a higher likelihood of recidivism. thus, such murderers pose a greater threat to society and should be punished more greatly. it has nothing to do with the victim getting privileged status. it has to do with the murderer's motive, mens rea, culpability, and likelihood of further crime.

810wmb

JD Sal wrote:

But you're looking at just the crime itself, not the repercussions. When hate crimes are commited, the chances for retaliatory crimes are greater. Look at the LA riots after the Rodney King beating. You don't think that society can suffer from the disempowerment of a group of people?

but the riots were bullshit...the rod man was a guilty bitch. they should have beat the crap out of him.

just the way this shit twist though.

810wmb

soulsinging wrote:

this is true. if you murder someone it is murder. if you murder based on prejudice, it is a murder and a threat against all people of the prejudiced group. criminal intimidation if you will. it also increases the likelihood of recidivism. a murder of passion is unlikely to be repeated. a murder becos you think group X doesn't deserve to live indicates a higher likelihood of recidivism. thus, such murderers pose a greater threat to society and should be punished more greatly. it has nothing to do with the victim getting privileged status. it has to do with the murderer's motive, mens rea, culpability, and likelihood of further crime.

wow, you just stated the case against radical islam

soulsinging

810wmb wrote:

wow, you just stated the case against radical islam

absolutely. if an islamic man in america kills some guy for being a white male christian, he should absolutely be convicted under a hate crime statute. that is how i view hate crimes... they are similar to terrorism. the goal is the criminal act (murder or bombing), but it is also to make a point and serve as some sort of warning of further violence against the hated group.

mammasan

JD Sal wrote:

But you're looking at just the crime itself, not the repercussions. When hate crimes are commited, the chances for retaliatory crimes are greater. Look at the LA riots after the Rodney King beating. You don't think that society can suffer from the disempowerment of a group of people?

I am also speaking as a minority and I don't feel that any group of people should be treated any differently. By basing the punishment on the act instead of the skin color of the perpetrator or the victim you take race out of the equation. Also the label of "Hate Crime' is not used equally. It is a hate crime when a group of white males attacks a black male or a homosexual. If you where to reverse the senerio and have a group of blacks attack a white male the label is seldom used which only helps to create more racial tension.

Pearls&Stones

Count me in the "anti" hate crime group. I think whether you kill a man because he's gay, because he's black, or because you want his leather jacket, they should all be treated equally and severely.

If a hate crime is to send fear to a certain group, wouldn't a home invasion for the sole purpose of a financial score be considered a hate crime then? Doesn't it send fear to the other people in that neighborhood?

I believe in civil rights and equality, but I hate the term "hate crime"

Ahnimus

On recidivism.

It doesn't matter so much what the intent was, but the intent as infered by the victim "group".

Again, the problem is society, it always is.

bgivens33

Pearls&Stones wrote:

Count me in the "anti" hate crime group. I think whether you kill a man because he's gay, because he's black, or because you want his leather jacket, they should all be treated equally and severely.

If a hate crime is to send fear to a certain group, wouldn't a home invasion for the sole purpose of a financial score be considered a hate crime then? Doesn't it send fear to the other people in that neighborhood?

I believe in civil rights and equality, but I hate the term "hate crime"

If you believe in civil rights and equality then you really should be against the term "hate crime". All hate crimes do is perpetuate inequality. If I drag, beat and hang a white man then I get one punishment but if I do the same thing to a black man... that is somehow different. I don't get it.

JD Sal

bgivens33 wrote:

If you believe in civil rights and equality then you really should be against the term "hate crime". All hate crimes do is perpetuate inequality. If I drag, beat and hang a white man then I get one punishment but if I do the same thing to a black man... that is somehow different. I don't get it.

The New York State Legislature wrote the following when it enacted the Hate Crimes Act of 2000:

Hate crimes do more than threaten the safety and welfare of all citizens. They inflict on victims incalculable physical and emotional damage and tear at the very fabric of free society. Crimes motivated by invidious hatred toward particular groups not only harm individual victims but send a powerful message of intolerance and discrimination to all members of the group to which the victim belongs. Hate crimes can and do intimidate and disrupt entire communities and vitiate the civility that is essential to healthy democratic processes. In a democratic society, citizens cannot be required to approve of the beliefs and practices of others, but must never commit criminal acts on account of them. Current law does not adequately recognize the harm to public order and individual safety that hate crimes cause. Therefore, our laws must be strengthened to provide clear recognition of the gravity of hate crimes and the compelling importance of preventing their recurrence. Accordingly, the legislature finds and declares that hate crimes should be prosecuted and punished with appropriate severity."

810wmb

JD Sal wrote:

The New York State Legislature wrote the following when it enacted the Hate Crimes Act of 2000:

Hate crimes do more than threaten the safety and welfare of all citizens. They inflict on victims incalculable physical and emotional damage and tear at the very fabric of free society. Crimes motivated by invidious hatred toward particular groups not only harm individual victims but send a powerful message of intolerance and discrimination to all members of the group to which the victim belongs. Hate crimes can and do intimidate and disrupt entire communities and vitiate the civility that is essential to healthy democratic processes. In a democratic society, citizens cannot be required to approve of the beliefs and practices of others, but must never commit criminal acts on account of them. Current law does not adequately recognize the harm to public order and individual safety that hate crimes cause. Therefore, our laws must be strengthened to provide clear recognition of the gravity of hate crimes and the compelling importance of preventing their recurrence. Accordingly, the legislature finds and declares that hate crimes should be prosecuted and punished with appropriate severity."

you lost me when you said "new york"

RolandTD20Kdrummer

If there were visible corn kernels in the feces then it's definitely a hate crime.

That's just savage.

On a serious note, I don't know what has to happen to a person to make then get off on this type of activity.