DCist: At GLOV Meeting, Disbelief that Hunter Provoked His Attacker

frooms21

Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:38:54 -0500

I'm sorry, but isn't anyone else outraged with Hanna saying that he was provoked because Hunter hit on him? Since when it is an appropriate response to kill someone because they told you that you have a nice ass?

will585

Wed, 22 Oct 2008 13:38:30 -0500

Fishpaw, That is the first time anyone has explained Hate Crimes to me and it made sense. Thanks.

ledroitist

Wed, 22 Oct 2008 09:57:36 -0500

Seems to me the (justifiable IMHO) anger is a little misplaced. It's the US Attorney, not the MPD, that decides what charges to bring.

gmail

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 16:39:58 -0500

Along those lines, it's just as silly to assume that people who ARE qualified by extension know what they're doing. Someone had to represent the Board of Education against Brown, and he sure as hell wasn't right.

Anonymous Girl in the City

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 16:29:48 -0500

Everyone thinks they know more then those who actual do the work required. In this case, I think we have a lot of people who like to watch CSI and Law & Order and now think they have are qualified to deal with this matter.

gmail

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 16:26:45 -0500

Assuming he wasn't lying about the "gay panic", the perp then was well aware of his victim's sexuality. And the fact that it wasn't just Tony Hunter who was attacked seems to point to the perp not just acting out of some bizarre attempt at "self defense." If the perp was going for plain robbery it should not have resulted in death. Not that accidental death during robbery does happen, but the circumstances point so strongly to the possibility of it being a hate crime that to dismiss it from the get-go, as opposed to letting the charge be dropped in a court of law, is what's bugging me. If there was a march from logan down P to shaw, I'd be up front with a banner-- as a shaw resident this scares the shit out of me.

Nate

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 16:16:39 -0500

Just to play devil's advocate for a second, isn't it possible that the perp is lying about the whole "gay panic" thing, but that the crime is still not one of bias? That he attacked the pair to rob them, got outrageously violent and killed one of his victims, without knowing or caring what their sexuality was? I certainly don't know for sure what the situation was that night, or precisely why the MPD made the decisions they did, but neither does anyone else here.

gmail

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 16:04:28 -0500

What do you think is the best way to express disgust to the MPD in this case?

Fishpaw

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:57:12 -0500

will585: The "concept of 'hate crimes'" is that certain crimes are more serious than others due to the thought process motivating the crime. For the same reason, premeditated murder is punished more severely than involuntary manslaughter and wilful actions are punished more severely than negligent ones. Thus, as a policy matter, some states have decided that we like hate crimes less than crimes motivated by other purposes. Compare: criminal throws brick through window because (1) he desired to vandalize property for fun or (2) he wanted to intimidate his Muslim neighbor. Doesn't one seem worse to you and worthy of additional punishment? If I kill someone not out of self defense but because they have tortured me for years, isn't that slightly more understandable and deserving of greater leniency than if I decide to kill someone for the thrill of it? Same principle. And since every hate crime law I know of addresses race generally, yes, if you are murdered because you are white then you are the victim of a hate crime.

Bullneck

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:51:19 -0500

Boomhauer: DC doesn't have to be Alabama to have a significant problem with homophobia and violence against GLBT folk. And yes, there is such a problem. Further, like Politboro says, standard prosecution procedure involves layering on charges at the start...and usually doesn't rely on perp testimony nor ignoring assault charges on a second victim.

gmail

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:39:48 -0500

This is riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiidiculous. Has Cathy Lanier ever heard of Matthew Shepherd? I hope she doesn't get a full eight hours of sleep until she rethinks this obviously f@@#ed up decision.

Politburo

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:34:13 -0500

Bommhauer - Could be, except that goes against standard law enforcement practice, which is to charge every crime imaginable at a press conference, and then quietly drop most of the charges later.

Boomhauer

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:18:38 -0500

Outrageous this isn't being filed as a hate crime, but completely unsurprising. DC and the region on the whole is pretty intolerant and phobic compared to the Northeast or California, and this latest incidence of violence against queers really just reveals the more quotidian toxicity displayed in more subtle ways by our neighbors, federal government policies, our elected officials, and, thanks to Chief Lanier, our police authorities. Or they didn't have enough evidence to make the charge stick, or maybe they'll add that charge later. I'm sure there are a myriad of reasons why they're not bringing 'Hate Crime' hammer down. its not like DC is Alabama; a good percentage of the population is homosexual. At least two of the thirteen city council members are gay. Its a little early to be jumping to conclusions.

will585

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:12:57 -0500

Ive never understood the concept of "hate crimes". Isnt the fact that this scum bag attacked two people and killed one enough to lock his ass away for long time? And if I attack a white person and kill him is it a hate crime if I call him cracker while I do it?

Bullneck

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:42:40 -0500

IMGoph

Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:42:13 -0500

so the police have the word of the other person who was attacked, and the word of the killer. and they're going with the word of the killer? sure sounds upsidedown to me