hate crimes l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
HATE CRIMES PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
HATE CRIMES

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 50

HATE CRIMES - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 317 Views
  • Uploaded on

HATE CRIMES. SUMMER, 2000. P CJCR 3956. INTRODUCTION. P A. Federal Legislation < April 25, 20000 - B Hate Crime legislation sought to B Expand current laws to include < < (a) sexual orientation P (b) Gender and disability P.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'HATE CRIMES' - bernadette


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
hate crimes
HATE CRIMES

SUMMER, 2000

PCJCR 3956

introduction
INTRODUCTION

PA. Federal Legislation

<April 25, 20000 -

BHate Crime legislation soughtto

BExpand current laws to include

<

<(a) sexual orientation

P (b) Gender and disability

P

slide3

PCurrent legislation allows for prosecution of crimes motivated by

P

<victim's race, religion, color or national origin.

<

<

<

slide4

B(2) Majority of hate crimes will continue to be prosecuted by state

B

Band local governments.

B

B(a) argued for broader federal laws allowing federal government to assist state and local governments in their prosecutions.

what is hate crime
WHAT IS HATE CRIME?

AMBIGUOUS

PDifficulty in determining:

<(1) what is meant by prejudice

<

<(2) which prejudices qualify for inclusion under hate

< crime

<(3) which crimes of prejudice become hate crimes

<

<(4) link between the perpetrator's prejudice and the perpetrator's criminal conduct

complexity of a hate crime @
COMPLEXITY OF AHATE CRIME@

Correlation to Prejudice

PCriminal conduct motivated by prejudice

<Concept held by all for against something

BIndividuals, groups, foods, countries

BRooted in experiences, fantasies, irrationality

BTraditional, learned behavior

prejudice justification
PREJUDICE JUSTIFICATION

Pfactually correct observations

<Anti-black vs pro-white

<Biases against rich, poor drunks, drug addicts

BAbove not necessarily transformed ordinary crime into hate crime

slide8

PRacial, religious and gender prejudices officially denounced in our laws

PHate crimes constitute "next generation" effort

PFederal and state legislatures choose which prejudices to officially condemn

<Some states sexual orientation included

<

<

impact of racial ethnic religious prejudice
IMPACT OF RACIAL/ETHNIC/RELIGIOUS PREJUDICE

POn average, blacks have worse jobs, income, and housing than white people? Yes? No?

PBlack respondent 44 percent attributed situation to discrimination

PWhite respondents 21 percent of white respondents chose discrimination as cause

P

P

prejudice against women
PREJUDICE AGAINST WOMEN

Do All Men Hate Women?

PAdam Jukes: Author of Why Men Hate Women

<Yes, they do

<Men harbor unconscious prejudice against women

<

slide11

P"The hatred of women may be, in most cases, a deeply repressed fact of the male character. At one extreme is the rapist or the sexual murderer, at the other extreme is the apparently ordinary man who does not rape or murder, and feels mild and hidden...contempt for women, or expresses it only in the privacy of his own home....."

slide12

PNational Conference of Christian and Jews(now National Conference)

<55 percent of survey's respondents believe that Catholics

B"want to impose their own ideas of morality on the larger society."

<Concluded that this was proof of widespread anti- Catholic prejudice

<

prevalence of hate crimes
PREVALENCE OF HATE CRIMES

Are Hate Crimes Serious?

PJanuary 1996 Hate Crimes Statistics revealed 7,400 hate crimes committed

<Number reported does not include those not reported

<Atty. Janet Reno: "hate crimes have long gone under reported"

<Higher incidence if crimes against sexual orientation included

history of tolerance
HISTORY OF TOLERANCE

VIDEO

PEquality declared in Constitution belonged to white men, not men of other races

PHate taught to next generation

<Each generation teaches the next who the enemy is

<Concept of savages regarding the Indians

<Systematic injustices toward African-Americans continued after slavery

slide15

P1913 Campaign by Georgians to convict Leo Frank for crime he didn't commit

PScapegoating Jews

PAttitudes regarding immigrants in 20th and 21st century similar to that expressed 150 years ago.

<Group hatred often originates from economic insecurity

<Cultural intolerance prevalent

<

<

variable exhibitions of hate
VARIABLE EXHIBITIONS OF HATE

Often Based on Racial Prejudice

PBlack prejudice and hatred of whites, especially Jews documented (remember film)

<Louis Farrakhann best known racist and anti-Semitic black leader

hate speech and hate crime acts
HATE SPEECH AND HATE CRIME ACTS

PJames Byrd and Matthew Shepard (1998)

P1999 Columbine High School Shootings

P1999 4th of July weekend racially motivated killings around Illinois and Indiana

P August 1999 LA daycare shooting spree by Buford Furrow.

P

P

slide18

PRacially motivated shooting spree by a black man in Wilkinsburg, PA.

P

<Left two dead and three wounded,

<Brought to light the fact that hate crimes do not discriminate.

increase in hate crimes
INCREASE IN HATE CRIMES

Pthe trend is growing,

Pperpetrators are getting bolder.

PKu Klux Klan 1994 Announcement

<December 1994 Macedonia Baptist Church in Bloomington, S.C.

<Church burned six months later

<Arrest of one revealed he was card carrying member of KKK

<

r a v v city of st paul
R.A.V v CITY OF ST. PAUL

505 U.S. 377

PJune 21, 1990 several teenagers made a crude cross by taping together broken chair legs. The cross was then placed inside the fenced yard of a black family and burned. The family lived across the street from one of the teenagers (who was the petitioner in the case). Petitioner was charged under the St. Paul Bias-Motivated Crime Ordinance

minn legis code 292 02
MINN. LEGIS. CODE 292.02

PWhoever places on public or private property a symbol, objects appellation, characterizations or graffiti, including, but not limited to, a burning cross or Nazi swastika, which one knows or has reasonable grounds to know arouses anger, alarm or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender commits disorderly conduct and shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

slide22

PDefendant appealed his conviction arguing that the law violated his right to free speech. District court agreed with defendant struck down the law on two grounds:

P

<1 Ordinance was overboard and vague

<

<2. First Amendment prevented St. Paul from banning cross as a form of expression.

<

slide23

State appealed to Minnesota Supreme Court

<State Supreme Court upheld law; Ruled:

BCross burning not a form of speech deserving First Amendment protection

B

BLaw was not overly broad

BApplies only to "fighting words"

B

B"Fighting words" words which would provoke a reasonable person to violence

u s supreme court
U.S. Supreme Court

June 22, 1992

PFirst rule on constitutionality of hate crime statutes

PReversed decision of Minnesota Supreme Court

PUnanimously agreed that law was too broad

PUnconstitutional prohibits permitted speech based on subjects of the speech

P

supreme court ruling
SUPREME COURT RULING

R.A.V. v St. Paul

PGeneral Rule: First Amendment prevents government from proscribing speech, expressive conduct

PCourt disagreed regarding why ordinance should be struck down

<Scalia: government cannot regulate fighting words on basis of viewpoint

slide26

Justice White

POrdinance fatally overboard

P

<Criminalizes unprotected expression

<

<Criminalizes expression protected by the First Amendment

<

slide27

Justice Stevens

<Significant that statute regulates only fighting words

<Fighting Words

BDetermined in part by content

BDirected at individuals

Bso as to "by their utterance inflict injury"

B

<Action crude form of physical intimidation

<

<Message of racial hostility does not automatically endow it with complete constitutional protection

wisconsin v todd mitchell
WISCONSIN v TODD MITCHELL

508 U.S. 476

PMitchell, a black youth was convicted of beating a white victim

PRacially motivated aggravated battery normally carried a two-year maximum sentence

PSentence increased because jury found that Mitchell intentionally selected victim because of race

<Sentence increased to seven years by Wisconsin Statute

P

mitchell contd
MITCHELL CONTD.

PMitchell sentenced to four years' imprisonment

PState Supreme Court invalidated sentence- enhancement scheme

PStatute posed same overboard threat to speech as R.A.V.

P

mitchell contd30
MITCHELL CONTD.

PU.S. Supreme Court reversed

<Mitchell aimed at violent conduct unprotected by First Amendment

<Singles out conduct thought to inflict greater individual and societal harm

<Penallty enhancement approach did not violate the First Amendment

BPunished conduct, not speech

support of increase
SUPPORT OF INCREASE

Hate Speech: Constitutional Violation?

PRacial inferiority planted as an idea that may have some validity

P

<Stereotypes

<Rejected but remains embedded in mind

slide32

PSpeech infringing on public order unprotected constitutional area

PBomb threats, incitements to riot,"fighting words", and obscene phone calls not protected by first amendment

BClose to category of racist speech

B

PExisting law insults which bring men to blows subject to first amendment exception

BRacist speech seen as part of ordinary jostling

BTolerance/accepting

BEffect of dehumanizing racist language often flight rather than fight

B

hate crimes increasing
HATE CRIMES INCREASING?

Anti-Semitism

PHoaxes?

<Octobeer 1992 actions

<December 1992(Rabbi Shaya Apteer,Semitic slurs,Joseph Fredrick

<Crown Heights activities

<Vandalism in Boroooough Park of New York

<Fires in Hartford Connecticut

political inclusion
POLITICAL INCLUSION

PRepublican: Rich Bond: "They are not America"

P

PDemocrat Jerry Brown statements, Vice- President Quayle

P

PPat Buchanan: religious war

current legislation
CURRENT LEGISLATION

PSince 1990, there have been several legislative moves addressing hate

Pcrimes:

PThe Hate Crimes Statistics Act of 1990

PViolence Against Women Act of 1994

PHate Crimes Sentencing Enhancement Act

PChurch Arsons Prevention Act of 1996

P

hate crimes prevention act of 1999
HATE CRIMES PREVENTION ACT OF 1999

Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999

PSentencing:

PWhoever, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or,

Pattempts to cause bodily injury to any person,

Pbecause of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any personB

P

slide38

PThe Violence Against Women Act of 1998

PHate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999

PIn addition, 42 states have hate crimes laws in effect, 21 of which

Pinclude legislation against acts of violence based on sexual orientation.

P