Comments on: Jury rejects hate crime charge in gay murder

By: snowisfun

snowisfun — Sat, 21 Apr 2012 00:34:33 +0000

Unsure about this case, but if the victim was harassing the suspect, then the verdict should’ve been a lesser charge, such as 2nd or Manslaughter instead of murder. If the victim was indeed going to try to homosexually rape the victim & the victim killed him, then he should be acquitted. The jury rejected hate crime charge, but hard to make conclusion based on this case.

Yes, I see something wrong with gay/lesbian activities & believe homosexual behaviors are comparable to crack smoking by willing adults. I believe in abolishing sex change mutilations. As it’s about ‘gay panic’ defense, if a defense lawyer wants to bring up anti-social conduct a gay did such as criminal harassment (repeatedly proposing after a man has said no is harassment) or assault&battery, then a jury must consider this in deciding what the verdict should be. Gays have no right to harass others. Most violence against gays happen to be domestic violence but I’ve found that when straight men bash or kill gays, they almost always do so because they react or overreact to criminal abuse the gay did. Gay groups call it ‘gay panic’ but I call it man reacting to abuse the gay had no right to do.

By: Michael

Michael — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 09:22:02 +0000

Well, now he’s going to be someone’s bytch.

By: Guest

Guest — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 20:01:46 +0000

I’m guessing his point was this: A jury that reflected the racial and sexual diversity of the District would likely have convicted a defendant of an anti-black hate crime based on the use of an anti-black slur in the exact same way. Do you disagree? The same could be said of an anti-Semitic or anti-Latino hate crime.

So why does the same racially and sexually diverse jury in D.C. refuse to find an anti-gay hate crime? You you have an answer?

And he’s also obviously posing the specific, provocative question why is it that white gay jurors would find an anti-black hate crime but straight black jurors won’t find an anti-gay hate crime. It is an uncomfortable question about homophobia in the black community. His mistake is to assume without knowing that the jury was racially mixed, but that’s a fair assumption in D.C.

By: Frankie James

Frankie James — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:55:35 +0000

So what if it was a Hate Crime, would he have get 10 more years on top of the 30? This boys life is gone, thank god.

He has been found guilty of first-degree murder, that is the best outcome.

By: Meredith

Meredith — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:52:16 +0000

If using derogatory words as descriptors rather than epithets is okay, why do we have hate crime legislation at all?

By: blue-heron

blue-heron — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 11:59:18 +0000

Let me guess,…There were no faggots on the jury?

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 08:11:19 +0000

Always have us Blacks your brain idiot?

By: Patrick Garies

Patrick Garies — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 01:19:34 +0000

It’s good that the perpetrator has been convicted. This is a pretty obvious case of jury nullification though if the above-cited facts are all correct; the attacker was clearly biased on the basis of sexual orientation.

By: Bill

Bill — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 23:48:59 +0000

I bet if a black man was murdered and called a ni**er by his murderer before he was killed, the jury would have come back with a hate crime verdict.

In fact, I’d bet my life on it.