• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Hate crime law gone awry.

3 lesbians charged with hate crimes after they beat up a gay guy while calling him a fagot.

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.”
But Carolyn Euell, 38, mother of two of the defendants, Erika Stroud, 21, of Dorchester and Felicia Stroud, 18, West Roxbury, told reporters the alleged attack “can’t be hateful” because both her daughters are lesbians.
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.”
But attorney Helene Tomlinson, who represented Sanford, told the judge her client is “openly identified as a lesbian ... so any homophobic (conduct) is unwarranted.” She said the alleged victim was the aggressor and used racial slurs: “He provoked them.”
Felicia Stroud’s attorney, C. Harold Krasnow, said, “They don’t know what his sexual orientation is, just like he doesn’t know what theirs is.”
Krasnow later noted the low bail the judge gave the women, $100 to $500 cash, and suggested the prosecution’s case was weak.
Civil-rights attorney Chester Darling agreed. “No one should go to court. It’s knuckle justice,” he said. “It’s a fair exchange.”
But Jake Wark, a spokesman for Suffolk District Attorney Daniel F. Conley, said prosecutors will have no problem proving the women committed a hate crime, even if they are lesbians.
“The defendants’ particular orientation or alleged orientations have no bearing on our ability to prosecute for allegedly targeting a person who they believe to be different from them,” he said.
+1 what Harvey said.

pics in the link.

http://bostonherald.com/news/region...esbians_assault_on_gay_man_cant_be_hate_crime


Anyone from Boston with more details.
 
thoughtpolice.jpg
 
I'm fine with hate crime charges if the person was picked on because of a protected status. But if you get into a bar fight and use a racial slur in the middle of it, it shouldn't be charged as a hate crime. In this case it seems the fight happened for a different reason than his sexual orientation.
 
“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.”

But they aren't the same group... lesbians don't like cock, therefore can't be in the same group as homosexual men.

It's a hate crime!

/stanceofdominance
 
So their defense is because we are gay, we cant be homophobes and thus hate crime doesnt exist?

kk

I completely agree trying to bring further action based on interpreting intent is a recipe for failure.
 
Yeah, I never quite understood hate crime. A crime is a crime is a crime, whether you beat someone up and rob them due to their race, or just because you wanted thier stuff, they should be treated the same.
 
I don't see the problem...? Three lesbian homophobes beat up a gay guy, and are now charged with a hate crime... Seems about right.
 
Seems entirely appropriate to me...

Maybe this will wake a few retards up to the total stupidity of "hate crime" laws
 
my communistic nanny state must be broken, because we don't have hate crime laws around here :hmm:

don't the secret police take care of that for everyone? i mean the hating , well i guess i mean the hating and the hate crimes/thought crime deterrence and stuff
 
A quick Google search seems to indicate that there are hate crime laws in Denmark...

Looks like they term it "hate speech"
Denmark prohibits hate speech, and defines it as publicly making statements that threaten, ridicule or hold in contempt a group due to race, skin colour, national or ethnic origin, faith or sexual orientation.[20]
Also
Danish law includes hate crimes legislation, which adds extra penalties for crimes committed against people because of their sexuality.

Both are quoted from Wiki...
 
Last edited:
A quick Google search seems to indicate that there are hate crime laws in Denmark...

nope, there aren't. the judge will take motive into consideration when coming up with the punishment and what you call hatecrimes can be reason for a hasher sentence but that is the judges perogative.

§ 81, pkt. 6 in the penal code basically says that the judge can take aggravating circumstances into account, but he doesn't have to.
 
Back
Top