First thing I noticed was that the reporter refered to Araujo as a “transgendered” person. The reality is that Araujo was a homosexual male who dressed and lived as a female. Apparently, Araujo enjoyed fooling men into having sex with him.
The story also states that all four defendants would have “hate crime” statutes applied. Why is that? Araujo was the one who was fooling young heterosexuals into having sex with him. I don’t get how they can get his attackers on a “hate crime” charge.
Now picture this, guys. You are inside a nightclub and a good looking female comes up to you and starts chatting. You hit it off and then she wants to take you out to her car so that you can get it on. Halfway through the motions, you realize “she” is a man. You proceed to beat the hell out the dude, only to be charged with a “hate crime”.
Why is beating the hell out of the dude the next logical step?
I’m not sure of the laws that dictate when an act becomes a hate crime, but it doesn’t surprise me that it was in this case. They attacked Aruajo because he was gay and tricked them into thinking he was a she. There is no justification for that that I can see.
I agree with Diogenes, Hermann. Had it been one man who simply slugged “Lida” one time and got out of the car, I would probably be sympathetic. It’s not nice to fool other people.
However, only cowards fight four on one and these vile punks went beyond that. I don’t believe in hate crime legislation, but if I were the prosecutor, I would seriousily consider going for the death penalty.
Well, I’m not defending them for murdering the man who fooled them into having sex with him. That was wrong.
What I question is how come the defendants are facing “hate crime” charges.
No, wrong. They did not attack Araujo because he was a homosexual. Neither did they attack Araujo because he dressed up as a female. No, they attacked Araujo because Araujo misreprepresented himself as a female and he seduced heterosexual men to have sex with him.
A young man in high school went into a bar to drink. He was approached by an older man who told him he had porno movies at his apartment, and invited the young man over.
When the young man got there he found out the older man was gay and really just wanted sex with him. He hit the older man just once, but it was enough to kill him. Young man served 25 years in prison.
So, where does the "hate crime"statute come into play? Being that the defendants didn’t “hate” all homosexuals, but rather were pissed off that this one particular homosexual was perpetrating a fraud.
The very fact that would fly into a homocidal rage over being fooled by a homosexual is, in itself, indicative of profound homophobia. Being fooled is in no way a mitigating factor for violence.
Hermann, you need to do a little research on the facts before you decide what Ms Araujo was or wasn’t. She’s identified as female since she was little.
Whatever though, those punks had no “right” to kill her. And they have no excuse. I think they’re a danger to society, and should get life in prison.
What? did you expect outrage against her?
Peace,
mangeorge
Man, this story just seethes with classy behavior. Guy meets chiquita in bar, who apparently so totally falls in love with him she wants to go out to a car for sex. An idea he likes. Because he’s stupid.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I don’t mind a woman with some sense of adventure. This ain’t it, this is the behavior of a skag, a natural born cum-dumpster. I wouldn’t screw her with a rented pecker. What the hells the matter with this clown?
Also, it doesnt matter that Mr. Araujo identified himself as female. He was still a male.
Who are you refering to when you use the term “her”?
The story doesn’t refer to a “her”. The story refers to a male homosexual who liked to fool male heterosexuals into having sex with him. And how the male herosexuals are charged with “hate crimes” because they punished the male homosexual for fooling them.