And again and again and again ...
Posted on 06/25/2015 7:08:40 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Citing unnamed "federal law enforcement officials," The New York Times reports that the Justice Department probably will file federal hate crime charges against Dylann Roof in connection with last week's massacre at the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston. Since Roof already faces nine murder charges in state court, where he will be subject to the death penalty if convicted, an additional federal prosecution seems gratuitous. It does not even offer the prospect of a more severe punishment.
To the contrary, the maximum penalty Roof would face under federal law is life in prison, while there is a distinct possibility that South Carolina will execute him.
The Times concedes that a conviction in state court "would make federal action largely symbolic." Still, federal prosecutors are eager to pursue the case, because what's the point of having a federal hate crime law if you don't use it to prosecute someone like Dylann Roof? "This directly fits the hate crime statute," one of those unidentified law enforcement officials tells the Times. "This is exactly what it was created for."
Was the hate crime statute really created to allow redundant, "largely symbolic" prosecutions of people who have already been sentenced to life in prison or death? Not quite. It has practical functions as well. For instance, it allows the Justice Department to prosecute someone after he is acquitted in state court. Under the Supreme Court's "dual sovereignty" doctrine, that does not count as double jeopardy.
In short, the hate crime statute is a handy tool for grandstanding prosecutors, letting them federalize any violent crime they claim was motivated by bigotry—even when the bigotry pits members of the same religious sect against each other. Officially the law does not punish people for their beliefs, which obviously would be a grave violation of the First Amendment.
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
Well, they could keep executing him and bringing him back to life until he became unresponsive!
lol....actually that would be cool if that could happen. Although I imagine the Devil is already preparing for his arrival.
“Hate Crime” is just a straw man term in order to scapegoat a particular race, and to make liberals feel better.
Any murder is done out of hate.
Ah, here he is....Whoops, hey where'd he go?
Murder, by definition, is not an “I really, really like you” crime.
For the Left the “hate” aspect is much more important than the actual crimes. Thought is much more dangerous than gunfire.
Yes, its not all that infrequent. In 2013 21.4% of federal hate crime statistics documented crimes with an anti-white bias. Not all those hate crimes against whites were committed by blacks but many were.
https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2014/december/latest-hate-crime-statistics-report-released
From The Washington Times: “Race-based hate crimes spike in D.C.; whites most common victims, but underreporting feared”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/aug/19/race-based-hate-crimes-spike-in-dc/?page=all
Personally, if the progressive-socialists what to hype this...I say let him go.
If he commits a crime, the Judge will pronounce life or death.
With a HATE CRIME, the Judge will frown and look mean at you while he pronounces Life or Death.
Hate Crime is Thought Crime.
Liberals love Thought Crime.
Orwell is spinning in his Grave.
From a legal standpoint, the whole concept of “hate crimes’ is ridiculous:
1: It seeks to add another lessor offense to an already usually serious felonious act. It’s like the thought that more gun laws will decrease crime. The “hate crime” actor is already killing someone, on in the case of gun laws, perhaps robbing a store. The fear of one minor law (the “hate crime” laws) is not going to stop a person already determined to commit the major crime.
2: It requires a guess of the actor’s thoughts. No jury can do that. Every guilty perp who gets off has lied to the jury, and the jury has failed to read their thoughts. From a legal standpoint, asking a jury to determine a perp’s thoughts is asking for the impossible
3: Impossible to define. If a White kills a Black, is it a hate crime every time? What if they kill a half Black person? A 1/64 Black person? A hated but same race mother-in-law? What happens when a White kills a Ms Dolezal-type who is a 100% White pretending to be Black.
It’s all a stupid sop, a feel-good law. It’s supposedly a solace and benefit to the family of victims, to make them feel better that the perp has been arrested on additional charges.
The family’s actual attitude? Sorry, but the vic is still dead.
Penalty for a Hate Crime?
(With apologies to Monty Python;) The Judge will fart in your general direction.
I see what you are saying. I do think it matters as a matter of precedent. I am not a big fan of the hate crime laws anyway. Isn’t all murder varying degrees of hate? Certainly it is not love. And tagging other crimes as hate just to make the punishment more severe seems wrong to me. Doesn’t all crime have a bad motive? It makes sense to take motive into account to the degree that it is premeditated. But “hate” just results in making some people more valuable than other people.
This allows the criminalization of language, even thought -- which is a long-term objective of the Left.
I agree.
There is an entirely obvious default assumption that violent crimes committed by white people against black people must be a hate crime.
And an equally obvious need for overwhelming evidence of bias before such charges will be filed against black people committing crimes against whites. But such charges have been filed.
Dylan Roof should hang from a tree for murder in the first degree.
What are hate crimes?
And again and again and again ...
Its all about the money. The justice dept has to keep lawyers and clerks employed so they can get bonuses and perhaps add staff for this massive undertaking.
Then after this is done they will have more staff to file more hate crime charges against people.
As a plus the AG and other staff will get their face plastered all over TV for name recognition to aid their future run for elected office.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.