Teen's killing a hate crime, Police Searching For Her Car

The murder of 18-year-old Angie Zapata — who's birth name was Justin Angie and lived as a woman — was probably a hate crime, said a spokesperson for the Zapata family.

[Hate Crime - what is it]

was probably a hate crime?

I still don't get hate crimes. Aren't all crimes hate? If I kill you is that not hatred? Does it make it worse if you are a gay person, or a black person, how about a gay muslim black guy. Does that top the pile? Crime is a crime is a crime. If someone punches me, is that not hatred, but yet because I am a white male, I can not use that.

Just a liberal fascist law creating more problems than actually solving problems.

[Rick in Kansas]

Hate Crime - what is it wrote:

was probably a hate crime?
I still don't get hate crimes. Aren't all crimes hate? If I kill you is that not hatred? Does it make it worse if you are a gay person, or a black person, how about a gay muslim black guy. Does that top the pile? Crime is a crime is a crime. If someone punches me, is that not hatred, but yet because I am a white male, I can not use that.
Just a liberal fascist law creating more problems than actually solving problems.

No, not all crimes, not even all murders are motivated by hatred. Hate crimes are not based on the possible hatred you as a person but the advocated hatred of you as a representation of everyone else in your perceived group. Crimes that are motivated entirely by hatred of a race, ethnicity, religion, sex or sexual orientation are frequently random acts of extreme violence intended to send a chilling message to anyone else in that group that this is as much for them as the victim themself. The purpose of hate crime laws is to ensure justice for the victims, as all too often violence directed particularly at minority groups often went as more or less excused in this country. Even though these laws were written to primarily redress crimes aimed at minority groups, they do in fact apply to all of us. If you are ever a victim of a crime motivated by hatred of you as white, or male or even heterosexual, hate crime enhancements would apply in those situations as well.

[Kelli Busey]

I think I dissed you Troll Basher, my bad!

[Kelli Busey]

Hate Crime - what is it wrote:

was probably a hate crime?
I still don't get hate crimes. Aren't all crimes hate? If I kill you is that not hatred? Does it make it worse if you are a gay person, or a black person, how about a gay muslim black guy. Does that top the pile? Crime is a crime is a crime. If someone punches me, is that not hatred, but yet because I am a white male, I can not use that.
Just a liberal fascist law creating more problems than actually solving problems.

It's not your fault you are ignorant. You belong to a segement of society not currently under attack.

Hate crime is as stated by Rick, committed to terrify and subjugate a segment of society. Hitlers goons attacked the weakest they could find knowing they would cow the entire population. We of the Queer community scream when violence is committed to ANY of our own. So honey if screaming angry gay people upset you, o well!

[Hate Crime - what is it]

Rick in Kansas wrote:

<quoted text>
No, not all crimes, not even all murders are motivated by hatred. Hate crimes are not based on the possible hatred you as a person but the advocated hatred of you as a representation of everyone else in your perceived group. Crimes that are motivated entirely by hatred of a race, ethnicity, religion, sex or sexual orientation are frequently random acts of extreme violence intended to send a chilling message to anyone else in that group that this is as much for them as the victim themself. The purpose of hate crime laws is to ensure justice for the victims, as all too often violence directed particularly at minority groups often went as more or less excused in this country. Even though these laws were written to primarily redress crimes aimed at minority groups, they do in fact apply to all of us. If you are ever a victim of a crime motivated by hatred of you as white, or male or even heterosexual, hate crime enhancements would apply in those situations as well.

Sorry Rick, I don't buy that. I don't think anyone deserves harsher laws and sentences than anyone. If I kill a man who happened to be gay, that would be a hate crime. Regardless if I knew he was gay. That is not fair. Because not only will I be guilty of murder but also of hate crime.

But if I were to kill an ordinary white man, than whatever, get the guilty verdict on murder that is it.

Murder is wrong. That is what should be taught. Doing criminal activities is wrong, that is what needs to be taught. Not, don't kill a gay person because than not only is it murder but than a hate crime too.

[Hate Crime - what is it]

Kelli Busey wrote:

<quoted text>
It's not your fault you are ignorant. You belong to a segement of society not currently under attack.
Hate crime is as stated by Rick, committed to terrify and subjugate a segment of society. Hitlers goons attacked the weakest they could find knowing they would cow the entire population. We of the Queer community scream when violence is committed to ANY of our own. So honey if screaming angry gay people upset you, o well!

First you start off really rudely suggeting that any opinion other than your own is wrong.
Second, what are you talking about screaming angry gay people.

This is the problem, you right away pull the gay card. All I am saying is the crime is wrong. Regardless if you are gay straight or whatever. I have heard gay people being killed and so on, but I don't think anyone was sending any message. Because if there was a message wouldn't we be seeing the slaying of many minorities? We don't, because it is the crime that is wrong. People now that killing is wrong and hateful.

If you committed a crime out of hatred on a white male, if would just be considered a crime. Even though you did it out of hatred.

It is the crime that is wrong and that needs to be taught, not this many leveled judicial systems that treats some crimes more offensive than others.

What Hitler did was a war crime, a genocide, trying to kill off a certain race from this world.

[David Weintraub]

White Rock, Canada:

It makes a difference whether someone kills you because they want to take your wallet, versus kills you because you are a member of some category of person. It doesn't matter to *you*, because you are dead either way; rather, it matters to all the other members of that group. The message to them is "you are being hunted, you could be next." The distinction between the victim and the group the victim represents is what is confusing you.

[Rick in Kansas]

Hate Crime - what is it wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry Rick, I don't buy that. I don't think anyone deserves harsher laws and sentences than anyone. If I kill a man who happened to be gay, that would be a hate crime. Regardless if I knew he was gay. That is not fair. Because not only will I be guilty of murder but also of hate crime.
But if I were to kill an ordinary white man, than whatever, get the guilty verdict on murder that is it.
Murder is wrong. That is what should be taught. Doing criminal activities is wrong, that is what needs to be taught. Not, don't kill a gay person because than not only is it murder but than a hate crime too.

You're deliberately misapplying the nature of these laws. A crime is not a crime of hate unless the expressed motivation for the crime is the hatred of the group that the person represents. Victimizing a gay person or a racial, religious or ethnic minority or majority for that matter is not classifiable as a hate crime unless and until it can be proved that your expressed motivation for committing the crime was solely on the basis of the group that person belongs to. Killing a gay person is not a hate crime unless your only motivation for doing so was because you hate gay people. No one is given a special protection under these laws (do not kill a gay person, do not kill a black person and so forth), the intent is to enhance any possible sentence on the basis that the perpetrator was in reality targeting a much larger group than the victim theemself. An entire community of people is victimized by a crime motivated by the hatred of that group and hate crime laws were enacted to reflect that fact.

[Hate Crime - what is it]

Rick in Kansas wrote:

<quoted text>
You're deliberately misapplying the nature of these laws. A crime is not a crime of hate unless the expressed motivation for the crime is the hatred of the group that the person represents. Victimizing a gay person or a racial, religious or ethnic minority or majority for that matter is not classifiable as a hate crime unless and until it can be proved that your expressed motivation for committing the crime was solely on the basis of the group that person belongs to. Killing a gay person is not a hate crime unless your only motivation for doing so was because you hate gay people. No one is given a special protection under these laws (do not kill a gay person, do not kill a black person and so forth), the intent is to enhance any possible sentence on the basis that the perpetrator was in reality targeting a much larger group than the victim theemself. An entire community of people is victimized by a crime motivated by the hatred of that group and hate crime laws were enacted to reflect that fact.

But rick, here is the problem. Most murders are thought out. You don't carry a gun and randomly shoot people (unless you are some sicko terrorist). They are planned out.

Alright, people don't go carrying a knife around and stabbing people. Well in scream they did but whatever. Most crimes are planned out. They think about breaking into a house, beating up someone, robbing a bank, stabbing someone, murdering someone. One may think well today I am going to stab someone and than randomly do it on the street.

Here let me quote some interesting finds to you..
FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program indicated in 2001 said of its hate crime program
"law enforcement investigation is critical to the determination process because it must reveal sufficient evidence as to whether the offender's actions were motivated, in whole or in part, by bias. FOR THIS REASON, THE SUCCESS OF THE PROGRAM RESTS WITH THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS WHO DETERMINE THAT A BIAS MOTIVATION DOES INDEED EXIST." (I emphasised the last part because of what intentions are meant)

So the problem here is the programs definition of success rests on finding "bias" or "hate" in a crime. It goes on to say;

"hate crimes are not seperate, distinct crimes; instead, they are traditional offences motivated by the offenders bias."

So how do you find the bias? Well the offender is not around usually after the crime, just the victim. So who is questioned, the victim.

So if I was a drug user and needed money bad, robbed a man on the side of the road taking his wallet, and the man was gay. The police arrive and the gay gives the witness report and than says he is gay, what evidence is there against the hate crime? None, even though the drug user just did it for the cash. Wrong place at the wrong time.

How about gay on gay violence, or black on black. It doesn't matter which minority group, but this shows another flaw in the hate crime. If a gay guy was beat by another gay guy is that a hate crime? What if a homosexual killed a homosexual and wasn't found. Is that killing of the homosexual hate, because they haven't traced it back to who did it?

[sanzz]

the problem I have with hate crimes is how to figure out if murder/violence is hate motivated. Does the perpetrator have to verbally express his "hate" towards the other group, or belong to a specific "hate group". How about if he/she doesn't? I mean, how can law enforcement determine it is a hate crime rather than crime in general. So if a man murders a transexual , it is a hate crime already? Why? What if he doesn't hate transexuals in general but was in a fit of rage when he murdered the victim( betrayal, out of jealousy etc) I don't understand.... Now some cases are obvious like what the byrd case in texas but others are very vague and still "hate crime" is used.

[nhjeff]

Hate Crime - what is it wrote:

<quoted text>
But rick, here is the problem. Most murders are thought out. You don't carry a gun and randomly shoot people (unless you are some sicko terrorist). They are planned out.
Alright, people don't go carrying a knife around and stabbing people. Well in scream they did but whatever. Most crimes are planned out. They think about breaking into a house, beating up someone, robbing a bank, stabbing someone, murdering someone. One may think well today I am going to stab someone and than randomly do it on the street.
Here let me quote some interesting finds to you..
FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program indicated in 2001 said of its hate crime program
"law enforcement investigation is critical to the determination process because it must reveal sufficient evidence as to whether the offender's actions were motivated, in whole or in part, by bias. FOR THIS REASON, THE SUCCESS OF THE PROGRAM RESTS WITH THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS WHO DETERMINE THAT A BIAS MOTIVATION DOES INDEED EXIST." (I emphasised the last part because of what intentions are meant)
So the problem here is the programs definition of success rests on finding "bias" or "hate" in a crime. It goes on to say;
"hate crimes are not seperate, distinct crimes; instead, they are traditional offences motivated by the offenders bias."
So how do you find the bias? Well the offender is not around usually after the crime, just the victim. So who is questioned, the victim.
So if I was a drug user and needed money bad, robbed a man on the side of the road taking his wallet, and the man was gay. The police arrive and the gay gives the witness report and than says he is gay, what evidence is there against the hate crime? None, even though the drug user just did it for the cash. Wrong place at the wrong time.
How about gay on gay violence, or black on black. It doesn't matter which minority group, but this shows another flaw in the hate crime. If a gay guy was beat by another gay guy is that a hate crime? What if a homosexual killed a homosexual and wasn't found. Is that killing of the homosexual hate, because they haven't traced it back to who did it?

It appears to me that you are deliberately being dense. You simply choose not to understand.

[BlueLamp]

Hate Crime - what is it wrote:

was probably a hate crime?
I still don't get hate crimes. Aren't all crimes hate? If I kill you is that not hatred? Does it make it worse if you are a gay person, or a black person, how about a gay muslim black guy. Does that top the pile? Crime is a crime is a crime. If someone punches me, is that not hatred, but yet because I am a white male, I can not use that.
Just a liberal fascist law creating more problems than actually solving problems.

If you kill cop isn't that just murder? No, not according to the law. It's worse and results in harsher sentencing.

[nhjeff]

sanzz wrote:

the problem I have with hate crimes is how to figure out if murder/violence is hate motivated. Does the perpetrator have to verbally express his "hate" towards the other group, or belong to a specific "hate group". How about if he/she doesn't? I mean, how can law enforcement determine it is a hate crime rather than crime in general. So if a man murders a transexual , it is a hate crime already? Why? What if he doesn't hate transexuals in general but was in a fit of rage when he murdered the victim( betrayal, out of jealousy etc) I don't understand.... Now some cases are obvious like what the byrd case in texas but others are very vague and still "hate crime" is used.

Nobody said it would always be easy to determine whether the label "hate crime" applies. But we hope that law enforcement personnel do their best, just like every other decision they make.

"Hate crime" is decidedly NOT dependent on the victim's membership in a particular group, but rather the perpetrator's motivation for committing the crime. So the fact that a trans-sexual was killed is not evidence that it was a hate crime. It could have been a jilted lover, a burglary gone bad, or anything. The police won't know until they find the killer.

When a black kills a white because he hates whites, that is a hate crime just as vice versa.

[devons]

I'm always amazed when people object to the hate crime legislation. It's basically a stricter sentencing guideline for those that target people identified belonging to a certain group. This is no different then what terrorists do. It almost seems that some people are in favor of terrorism as long as it is confined to a group they don't agree with.

[BlueLamp]

devons wrote:

I'm always amazed when people object to the hate crime legislation. It's basically a stricter sentencing guideline for those that target people identified belonging to a certain group. This is no different then what terrorists do. It almost seems that some people are in favor of terrorism as long as it is confined to a group they don't agree with.

Good point.

[Rick in Kansas]

Hate Crime - what is it wrote:

<quoted text>
But rick, here is the problem. Most murders are thought out. You don't carry a gun and randomly shoot people (unless you are some sicko terrorist). They are planned out.
Alright, people don't go carrying a knife around and stabbing people. Well in scream they did but whatever. Most crimes are planned out. They think about breaking into a house, beating up someone, robbing a bank, stabbing someone, murdering someone. One may think well today I am going to stab someone and than randomly do it on the street.
Here let me quote some interesting finds to you..
FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program indicated in 2001 said of its hate crime program
"law enforcement investigation is critical to the determination process because it must reveal sufficient evidence as to whether the offender's actions were motivated, in whole or in part, by bias. FOR THIS REASON, THE SUCCESS OF THE PROGRAM RESTS WITH THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS WHO DETERMINE THAT A BIAS MOTIVATION DOES INDEED EXIST." (I emphasised the last part because of what intentions are meant)
So the problem here is the programs definition of success rests on finding "bias" or "hate" in a crime. It goes on to say;
"hate crimes are not seperate, distinct crimes; instead, they are traditional offences motivated by the offenders bias."
So how do you find the bias? Well the offender is not around usually after the crime, just the victim. So who is questioned, the victim.
So if I was a drug user and needed money bad, robbed a man on the side of the road taking his wallet, and the man was gay. The police arrive and the gay gives the witness report and than says he is gay, what evidence is there against the hate crime? None, even though the drug user just did it for the cash. Wrong place at the wrong time.
How about gay on gay violence, or black on black. It doesn't matter which minority group, but this shows another flaw in the hate crime. If a gay guy was beat by another gay guy is that a hate crime? What if a homosexual killed a homosexual and wasn't found. Is that killing of the homosexual hate, because they haven't traced it back to who did it?

The application of the law is actually much simpler than you are attempting to make it out to be. In most instances of successful prosecution of those under the law, the hate motivation has been made obvious by the perpetrators and is easily enough proved. A prosecutor can charge someone with a hate crime enhancement, but if they are unable to prove the underlying charge beyond a reasonable doubt a jury will not convict. They in all probability will convict of the underlying crime if that in fact is proved but decline to convict of the hate enhancement if that is not proved. "THE SUCCESS OF THE PROGRAM" is in demonstrating that crimes motivated by hate will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and essential to that end is that it "RESTS WITH THE LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS WHO DETERMINE THAT A BIAS MOTIVATION DOES INDEED EXIST".

As for someone within any given group being prosecuted for a hate crime perpetrated against someone of their same group it can and has happened. In a case just this past year out of New York, a young man accused of participating in a scheme to lure gay men over the internet in an attempt to rob them which resulted in one of their victims being chased into traffic where he was struck and killed attempted to use the claim that he was actually gay which should negate the hate enhancement to any possible convictions. The jury rejected the notion in that is was proved that even though he himself might be gay, he did participate in a scheme that targeted gay men because of hatred for them. So yes, if someone within the same group is motivated by hate to commit a crime they are just as guilty of a hate crime as those who are outside the group with the same motivation.

[Hate Crime what is it]

nhjeff wrote:

<quoted text>
It appears to me that you are deliberately being dense. You simply choose not to understand.

Sorry NH Jeff, I don't buy the hate crime law. There is no way a citizen should have more rights than another citizen. Why do you think this works?

[Hate Crime what is it]

BlueLamp wrote:

<quoted text>
If you kill cop isn't that just murder? No, not according to the law. It's worse and results in harsher sentencing.

sorry bluelamp that doesn't work. Of course killing a cop is worse. These guys are meant to protect and serve. If you kill a cop on duty you are killing the person who is protecting society.

[Hate Crime what is it]

devons wrote:

I'm always amazed when people object to the hate crime legislation. It's basically a stricter sentencing guideline for those that target people identified belonging to a certain group. This is no different then what terrorists do. It almost seems that some people are in favor of terrorism as long as it is confined to a group they don't agree with.

Devons, come on, that is rediculous. The only people who agree with terrorism are the terrorists and their crones.

I don't understand how you can say that it is okay for a person to receive a more strict punishment because they commited a crime against a certain identifiable group.

This is a little far fetched but let's say you are going shopping. We are buying the same shirt, same size and we go to the check out and the cashier says "25.99 please" and you say "I am gay" and the cashier says "oh sorry 19.99".

When you seperate society groups and provide a more strict law to one group over the other seems to me that we are no longer in a free country but Iran. Where a crime against Islam is worse than a crime against a non-islam.

If you are gay and someone commits a crime against you than they should pay the penalty. Not a penalty times 1.5 because you are gay. If crime is the problem than make the punishment more severe.

[Hate Crime what is it]

nhjeff wrote:

<quoted text>
Nobody said it would always be easy to determine whether the label "hate crime" applies. But we hope that law enforcement personnel do their best, just like every other decision they make.
"Hate crime" is decidedly NOT dependent on the victim's membership in a particular group, but rather the perpetrator's motivation for committing the crime. So the fact that a trans-sexual was killed is not evidence that it was a hate crime. It could have been a jilted lover, a burglary gone bad, or anything. The police won't know until they find the killer.
When a black kills a white because he hates whites, that is a hate crime just as vice versa.

But is a crime, regardless of who they are. The victim impact statement will testify more to what happened than when they get the criminal.

I was a tourist in Africa once and a little kid came a held a knife to me. A cop was nearby and the kid ran off, but does this crime make it a hate? I mean this kid picked me out of a bunch of people. I probably looked like a tourist (being one of the only whitie there), if he committed the crime, is this hate? He selected me out.