Justice

ptlwp said:

Here in the the USA I believe, the hitting the guy is an assault and battery, the falling and hitting his head was a accident.

He'd get manslaughter and the judge could be as hard or lenient as he wanted to be.

But, calling someone a racial epithet is a felony, so it would be complicated, to say the least.

A racial epithet is not a felony. A actual felony has to be committed before the racial factor has figured in the crime. "Hate-Crimes" are very hard to prove. There is not a crime in "name calling" unless the name caller has shown that there may be a threat of violence behind the name calling.
This is not a racial issue at all ....... Everybody gets called names. The "racial" card gets tossed around so much it has lost it's credibility in most of society.
There is sadness in this story. I doubt if the samoan wanted to really hurt the name caller more then just a painful black eye. But his actions , which are malicious, caused a death.
Where do we go with a situation like this?

And the "he was a nice guy" does not always carry water....... I have personally heard several responsible people say "he was such a nice guy" about John Wayne Gacy.

There are too few facts to make a real opinion here. {My opinions too lack knowledge of the case.}

[font=Verdana]Defining Hate Crimes[/font]
[font=arial]No longer a Black and White issue[/font][font=verdana]by Ricco Villanueva Siasoco[/font]

[font=verdana]This article was posted on August 18, 1999.[/font]

"...Until justice rolls down like waters
and righteousness like a mighty stream."

[font=Arial]Buford O. Furrow opened fire at a Jewish community center. The avowed White supremacist will be prosecuted for hate crimes.[/font]

These powerful words were uttered by Martin Luther King, Jr. in the midst of the racial unrest of the 1960s. Decades later, it seems the unrest of that period has resurfaced—but this time with a broader target. Last week's rampage on a Jewish community center in Los Angeles reminds us that crimes once driven solely by hatred for one's race now stem from opposition to one's religion, gender, disability, or sexual orientation.

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, a non-profit organization which tracks hate crimes, there were over 500 hate groups operating in the U.S. in 1998. The Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles tallies even more, monitoring over 2,100 hate sites on the Internet.

The term "hate crime" is a part of our everyday vernacular. But what's the definition of a hate crime? What are the issues facing legislators, law enforcement officials, and the American public?

More importantly, why the proliferation of these violent crimes?

[font=Verdana]Seeking a definition[/font]

The dictionary defines a hate crime as "any of various crimes... when motivated by hostility to the victim as a member of a group (as one based on color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation)." But the term doesn't always carry a commonly understood meaning.

[font=Verdana]"What is really being punished, as [critics] see it, is a criminal's thoughts, however objectionable they may be. The actions - incitement, vandalism, assault, murder - are already against the law."

— Clyde Haberman[/font]

In the on-line magazine Slate, Eve Gerber writes, "The definition of a hate crime varies. Twenty-one states include mental and physical disability in their lists. Twenty-two states include sexual orientation. Three states and the District of Columbia impose tougher penalties for crimes based on political affiliation."

[font=Verdana]Evolution of hate crimes[/font]

In Hate Crimes: Criminal Law & Identity Politics, authors James B. Jacobs and Kimberly Potter recount the introduction of the term hate crime in 1985, coined in legislation centered around the Justice Department's collection of "hate crime statistics." The media picked up on the term and quickly began to write about an epidemic before these statistics had even been gathered.

Current legislation allows federal prosecution of a hate crime only if the crime was motivated by race, religion, national origin, or color. In addition, the assailant must intend to prevent the victim from exercising a federally protected right. The Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999, passed by the Senate in July 1999, seeks to expand federal jurisdiction over these crimes.

[font=Verdana]Controversial legislation[/font]

Dissenting opinions mar even a seemingly black and white issue such as hate crimes. Jacobs and Potter argue that hate crimes legislation is redundant, as these offenses are already punishable under the law.

Clyde Haberman of The New York Times described the views of hate crimes critics in a recent column. "What is really being punished, as they see it, is a criminal's thoughts, however objectionable they may be. The actions - incitement, vandalism, assault, murder - are already against the law."

[font=Arial]The Internet has enhanced communication between isolated hate groups.[/font][font=Verdana]Understanding perpetrators, victims[/font]

Last year the American Psychological Association issued the report Hate Crimes Today: An Age-Old Foe in Modern Dress. In the report Dr. Jack McDevitt, a criminologist, stated, "Hate crimes are message crimes. They are different from other crimes in that the offender is sending a message to members of a certain group that they are unwelcome."

The National Institute of Mental Health has funded the first major study of the consequences of hate crimes on victims, narrowing in on anti-gay hate crimes. Preliminary research indicates that hate crimes have more serious psychological effects than non-bias motivated crimes.

[font=Verdana]Lone wolves, strong packs[/font]

Understanding the nature of those who commit hate crimes may be the most difficult aspect to grasp. Contrary to the notion of hate group conspiracies, most offenders act as lone wolves: small cells, pairs, or individuals acting alone.

Identifying individuals planning hate crimes is a formidable task. One common trait is membership in a hate organization. The majority—and perhaps most recognizable—are fringe neo-Nazi or Ku Klux Klan groups, but some organizations such as the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) have reached a level of positive acceptance. At a recent CCC's national conference, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott— whose support of hate crimes legislation falters only because of its inclusion of homosexuality—was a keynote speaker.

[font=Verdana]Related Links[/font][font=Verdana]Summary of Hate Crime Statistics

Matthew Shepard (People in the News 1998)

Milestones in the Gay Rights Movement

Crime Index by State

Crime Data Web Sites

Southern Poverty Law Center

Human Rights Campaign[/font]

In fact, a copy of Hunter, a novel by William Pierce (the leader of the neo-Nazi National Alliance) was found with the belongings of Oklahoma City bomber McVeigh. Pierce, like others involved with hate groups, has cultivated ties with other white American ethnic groups within our borders and abroad.

The Internet has undeniably contributed to alliances among these hate groups. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center's estimates— more modest than the Simon Wiesenthal Institute's— hate sites rose from 163 web sites in 1997, to 254 in 1998.

[font=Verdana]Where do we go from here?[/font]

Changes in hate crime legislation— whether viewed favorably or negatively— are simmering. The Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999 was passed by the Senate, and awaits a vote in the House.

In the words of Vice President Al Gore: "We must send a clear and strong message to all who would commit crimes of hate: it is wrong, it is illegal, and we will catch you and punish you to the full force of our laws."

Information Please® Database, © 2005 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.

• Page
  

I used the racial content to illustrate the circumstances of the crime as opposed to suggesting that it should be dealt with differently because race was an issue. Would have been the same (IMO) if the guy had called him an [censored] or a [censored] or whatever. I just wanted to make it clear that the guy who died was looking for a fight and although he did not physically attack the young lad he was still the agressor.

If this story actually happened then the kid who punched out the 30 year old should be put in jail. for life! Why should we tolerate killers being on the loose? Who knows what else the samoan might do. He is too aggressive.

It of course was wrong to insult the kid racially but, come on... hitting someone for one word? What kind of a barbaric society we live in?

The racist dude got what he deserved though :p .

Ottis said:

If this story actually happened then the kid who punched out the 30 year old should be put in jail. for life! Why should we tolerate killers being on the loose? Who knows what else the samoan might do. He is too aggressive.

It of course was wrong to insult the kid racially but, come on... hitting someone for one word? What kind of a barbaric society we live in?

The racist dude got what he deserved though :p .

Are you for real? Are you saying that every person who punches someone should go to jail for life?

reminds me of the fellow with whom i worked once, black and proud, wore an african continent red green and gold symbol around his neck.

heard him remark to someone one day "call me that again and i'll [censored] you up"
i presume the same reference was used here but i didn't hear it. this did indeed quell other incidents of the type.

Fixey said:

17 year old Samoan school boy walking home at 1am gets called a [censored] by a 30 year old, the boy punches him once. 30 year old falls and hits head on pavement and dies......What should happen to the boy?

I can definitely understand this concept of somebody letting fly a few punches in a given situation.
Not too long ago I was sitting with a friend in a coffee bar minding my own business and some drunken thug approaches us and begins to ask me for money and then soon becomes abusive and threatening.
I was sitting there taking deep breaths and counting to ten and my friend suggested we simply leave before something unpleasant happened.
Now, the question I would like to ask all of you is this: Just imagine you were in the same coffee bar with a girlfriend and a drunk comes up and insults her in front of you?
I think the answer to that one is 80 per cent of guys would react. However, girls have the advantage in such a scenario as they have less testosterone which makes them far less aggressive or prone to jungle, pecking-order responses.

Ottis said:

If this story actually happened then the kid who punched out the 30 year old should be put in jail. for life! Why should we tolerate killers being on the loose? Who knows what else the samoan might do. He is too aggressive.

It of course was wrong to insult the kid racially but, come on... hitting someone for one word? What kind of a barbaric society we live in?

The racist dude got what he deserved though :p .

Maybe going slightly off track but I heard on TV that biologically speaking females don't go for the new-age, pacifist type at all but tend to be attracted to the he-men types who can react to provocations. Not that I'm suggesting you should all go out and kill someone next time you're insulted.
What I am saying is that most males with a higher level of testosterone will react somehow to being insulted in public and that those who simply pick up a bunch of roses, make the peace sign and scuttle off don't reflect the ideal published in the old Charles Atlas advert - the one about getting sand kicked in your face and drying uip and blowing away. 🙂

Carrera said:

I can definitely understand this concept of somebody letting fly a few punches in a given situation.
Not too long ago I was sitting with a friend in a coffee bar minding my own business and some drunken thug approaches us and begins to ask me for money and then soon becomes abusive and threatening.
I was sitting there taking deep breaths and counting to ten and my friend suggested we simply leave before something unpleasant happened.
Now, the question I would like to ask all of you is this: Just imagine you were in the same coffee bar with a girlfriend and a drunk comes up and insults her in front of you?
I think the answer to that one is 80 per cent of guys would react. However, girls have the advantage in such a scenario as they have less testosterone which makes them far less aggressive or prone to jungle, pecking-order responses.

Been there in a couple of cases. Most of the times the butt hole has backed down.
In one case I took a drunk to the ground,not by hitting him, but still prevented him from hitting an older gentleman who was the bar manager.
There are ways to disable a person without anger and without hurting them.
However it is hard to deal with a person on certain type of narcotics as they feel no and there adrenaline level is very high.
You must understand there were and are a few rednecks in my area.
BTW: Rednecks come in all colors ,shapes and sizes.

Fixey said:

17 year old Samoan school boy walking home at 1am gets called a [censored] by a 30 year old, the boy punches him once. 30 year old falls and hits head on pavement and dies......What should happen to the boy?

100 hrs. of Community service 😕 Seriously.
As an aside:

Quoted post said:

"The good of the people is the highest law"-Cicero

davidmc said:

100 hrs. of Community service 😕 Seriously.
As an aside:

What if he,the dead victim, left behind fatherless children with no means of support. Who then serves them.
I am not looking for an answer just reflection since we ,or at least I, do not have many facts in the matter.
100 hours in trade for 50 years of life ,sorry Dave too liberal for me to consider without all the facts.

jhuskey said:

What if he,the dead victim, left behind fatherless children with no means of support. Who then serves them.
I am not looking for an answer just reflection since we ,or at least I, do not have many facts in the matter.
100 hours in trade for 50 years of life ,sorry Dave too liberal for me to consider without all the facts.

Who asked him to have children &, more importantly, who asked him to go shooting off his mouth at an adolescent 😕 He's lucky to have lived as long as he did what w/ his neolithic outlook on the human race.

Fixey said:

17 year old Samoan school boy walking home at 1am gets called a [censored] by a 30 year old, the boy punches him once. 30 year old falls and hits head on pavement and dies......What should happen to the boy?

Is there any other information relating to this case? I'm thinking that this was more than two people walking past each other and the only exchange (verbal or other) is "[censored]," and BOOM.
What's the history of both men? Did they know each other, previous relationship or conflicts?
While I don't know of any jurisdiction that has felony-name calling charges, there are some that have provisions for 'fighting words' or 'provoking words or gestures.'
What were they doing at 1am? Was it a school night for this 'school boy.'
Had either, or both, be using alcohol or other mind altering substances?
What race was the other guy? We've heard more lately about [censored] vs [censored], and who is 'authorized' to say these words.
What was the cause of death, the punch or the pavement?

That's just a few of the question I'd like answers to before I'd make judgment calls.
It sounds like a sad case all around.

davidmc said:

Who asked him to have children &, more importantly, who asked him to go shooting off his mouth at an adolescent 😕 He's lucky to have lived as long as he did what w/ his neolithic outlook on the human race.

Don't know that he had kids and don't know that he had a bad outlook on others.
Maybe he was just having a bad day,I don't know.
I assume you then think it is ok to kill someone if they offend you.

Chance3290 said:

Is there any other information relating to this case? I'm thinking that this was more than two people walking past each other and the only exchange (verbal or other) is "[censored]," and BOOM.
What's the history of both men? Did they know each other, previous relationship or conflicts?
While I don't know of any jurisdiction that has felony-name calling charges, there are some that have provisions for 'fighting words' or 'provoking words or gestures.'
What were they doing at 1am? Was it a school night for this 'school boy.'
Had either, or both, be using alcohol or other mind altering substances?
What race was the other guy? We've heard more lately about [censored] vs [censored], and who is 'authorized' to say these words.
What was the cause of death, the punch or the pavement?

That's just a few of the question I'd like answers to before I'd make judgment calls.
It sounds like a sad case all around.

You are correct. I am just going on w/ the information I was given (Man walks by boy & slings epithet-boy's fist meets mans face-mans face hits terra firma), albeit scant.

jhuskey said:

Don't know that he had kids and don't know that he had a bad outlook on others.
Maybe he was just having a bad day,I don't know.
I assume you then think it is ok to kill someone if they offend you.

It appears that the young mans actions were only the precursor to the offending parties ultimate demise. He merely precipitated/accelerated the offensive gentleman's departure to the next plane of existence.

davidmc said:

It appears that the young mans actions were only the precursor to the offending parties ultimate demise. He merely precipitated/accelerated the offensive gentleman's departure to the next plane of existence.

Yes, we are all going to terminate sometime,I however would prefer tp delay that event as long as possible.
On that note I have some unattended beer that may be going out of date.
I shall return at a later time.
Waste not want not!

Ok, more info is at hand. Dead guy had 3 kids, all better off without them (That came from a Child welfare source). He was bloody lucky to live aslong as he did, his [censored] was saved atleast 3 times during that night alone and was evicted from atleast one bar. The dead guy and the lad did not know each other so yes it was "[censored]" (Not sure how it was said phyisicaly wise) and boom dead. As I said I know this lad and I would be surprised if he reacted to just being called [censored], I would guess the guy may have got in his face, but that is just a guess.

Fixey said:

Ok, more info is at hand. Dead guy had 3 kids, all better off without them (That came from a Child welfare source). He was bloody lucky to live aslong as he did, his [censored] was saved atleast 3 times during that night alone and was evicted from atleast one bar. The dead guy and the lad did not know each other so yes it was "[censored]" (Not sure how it was said phyisicaly wise) and boom dead. As I said I know this lad and I would be surprised if he reacted to just being called [censored], I would guess the guy may have got in his face, but that is just a guess.

If the kid can plead self defence he should have a good chance of acquittal.The worst case scenario for him would be a manslaughter charge,and with regard for his good character and the provocation of the deceased,a moderate sentence.
Calling someone a "[censored]" is undoubtededly an aggressive act.If the accused had no intention to kill the deceased and the prosecution cannot prove that intention then the murder charge will probably be down-graded to manslaughter.
In the circumstances I think young Daniel would be pretty unlucky to even be convicted of manslaughter.
This case has a number of parallels with the David Hookes case (where the accused was acquitted on the grounds of self-defence).
If the kid was responding to a perceived threat then he'll walk,and rightly so.