Hate crimes - Not judging people by what is in their mind

[Razorsharp]

@pravnik

The case in which the U.S. Supreme Court first stated that enhancement of sentences based on intentionally selecting the victim because of their race, Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476 (1993). Mitchell and some other young black men were discussing the movie “Mississippi Burning” and a scene where a white man beat a young black boy who was praying. Mitchell asked if the group was “hyped to go move on some white people.”

Which is the whole purpose of movies of that genre, to incite racial annimosity.

The group moved outside and found a young white boy walking down the street. Mitchell told the group “You all want to fuck somebody up? There goes a white boy; go get him.” They beat the boy unconscious and stole his shoes. He remained in a coma for four days.

Gosh, I don’t ever remember hearing about that on the “nightly news”, but I still am occasionally reminded of the white racists who killed James Byrd.

Ordinarily the maximum for aggravated battery in Wisconsin would have been two years,

Seems that such a beating could have warranted a charge of attempted murder.

but because he selected the victims due to their race, the maximum was enhanced to seven and he received a four year sentence.

How much of the four-year sentence did he serve? A year? Six months?

For the same reason nothing about a “hate crime” appeared in the capital murder indictments of the men who dragged James Byrd to death in Texas:

Didn’t need to hear about it in the indictments, heard enough about it on the “nightly news”.

Ferguson had a 92 count charge, including six counts of first degree murder and 19 counts of attempted first degree murder, all of which carried A-1 punishments of life in prison. He received six consecutive life sentences. There was no way to pin a hate crime on him so that he could be treated more harshly.

Didn’t hear hardly anything about hate being a motive in that crime.

[Polycarp]

Razorsharp: Real or perceived media bias in reporting the news has little or nothing to do with the question of whether the element of intent that is integral to hate crime legislation is a valid one. I’d appreciate it if you’d address the intent question, with the idea that deterrence of violence founded in antipathy against people on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, etc., is a worthwhile goal, or not.

[holmes]

@Razorsharp

No, you didn’t just ask a simple question. The official crime statistics didn’t work for you, so you put up a hypothetical hoop for me to jump through. Forget it.

What hoop? My hypothetical was based on real world events. Again, it’s a real simple question. If Police only arrest a certain portion of its society, while allowing another group to get a pass; is the data infered from those arrests, which works it’s way into the crime statistics; valid?

Yes or No?

For years, stories of black and Latino drivers being searched on the basis of skin color alone were dismissed as anecdotal. But according to 91,000 pages of documents released by New Jersey officials last week, racial profiling has been standard operating procedure in that state for the last decade, and 80 percent of the state’s highway searches have involved black and Latino drivers.

article

80 percent of searches in New Jersey for a combined population of around 25%…hmmm. No wonder African-Americans appear to commit a disportionate amount of crime.

I’ll ask again. Is the data infered from such practices valid?

Jersey Census