White Man Shoots A Black Man Then Drags Him For 10 Miles And South Carolina Is Deciding If It’s A Hate Crime

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Pretty simple really. If it is a white man that did it to a black man then it is a hate crime. If a black man did it to a white man then it is NOT a hate crime.

Simple, sure. Except it isn't true.

[mawilson 2,133]

No need to assume, just look at the guy.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

First Arizona and now South Carolina. Anthony Hill, 30, was shot in the head by Gregory Collins, 19 year-old white male. Then Collins attached Hill to the back of his truck and dragged him for 10 miles… What is really going on in this world???

Newberry County deputies say a man found dead Wednesday morning had been shot in the head and dragged behind a pickup truck, and they’re now investigating to see if this could be a hate crime.

Sheriff Lee Foster identified the victim as 30-year-old Anthony Hill of Winnsboro at a Wednesday afternoon news conference with State Law Enforcement Division Director Reggie Lloyd.

The coroner concluded that Hill died from the gunshot wound.

Earlier in the day, deputies announced they’d arrested 19-year-old Gregory Ashton Collins in connection with the killing and charged him with murder.

Foster and Lloyd say they are investigating the possibility that the incident could be a hate crime. Hill is black, while Collins is white.

The FBI is assisting in the investigation.

“We’re acting with an abundance of caution, and we’re looking at that as one avenue,” Foster said. “It doesn’t necessarily mean that it is a hate crime, or that it will be judged a hate crime, or that it willl be judged a hate crime in the end. We want to go ahead while we’re doing the investigation to have a joint investigation with the FBI, who has jurisdiction over hate crimes.”

http://www.wltx.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=88178&catid=2

Maybe a crime of passion?

This is silly anyway.

The guy kills someone and drags them behind a car for 10 miles. OK, he should be executed by lethal injection. How will it be different if he is executed by lethal injection for a "hate crime" or just for murdering and dragging someone?

[CharlestonNative 0]

South Carolina isn't deciding if this is a hate crime. South Carolina HAS NO hate crime legislation on its law books, so it can't charge someone with something it doesn't have (they will have to pursue normal murder charges against this perpetrator). I do not agree with this (I think we SHOULD have hate crime legislation), but that is where it stands right now. In SC we're last in education, in the top 10 states for domestic violence against women,and in the top 10 states for infant mortality, among other things. Crimes against h*m*sexuals cannot be considered hate crimes either (again because of lack of hate crime legislation). Also, until about 10 years ago, marital r@pe was NOT A CRIME (as horrifying a thought as that is). We as a state have a long way to go.

[ScratchIt 12]

No need to assume, just look at the guy. He looks like a dumb #### who I would do something like that.

No bigotry here...

[Fandango 1,439]

South Carolina isn't deciding if this is a hate crime. South Carolina HAS NO hate crime legislation on its law books, so it can't charge someone with something it doesn't have (they will have to pursue normal murder charges against this perpetrator). I do not agree with this (I think we SHOULD have hate crime legislation), but that is where it stands right now. In SC we're last in education, in the top 10 states for domestic violence against women,and in the top 10 states for infant mortality, among other things. Crimes against h*m*sexuals cannot be considered hate crimes either (again because of lack of hate crime legislation). Also, until about 10 years ago, marital r@pe was NOT A CRIME (as horrifying a thought as that is). We as a state have a long way to go.

Ok, what would the difference be if it was categorized as a 'hate crime'?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

South Carolina isn't deciding if this is a hate crime. South Carolina HAS NO hate crime legislation on its law books, so it can't charge someone with something it doesn't have (they will have to pursue normal murder charges against this perpetrator). I do not agree with this (I think we SHOULD have hate crime legislation), but that is where it stands right now. In SC we're last in education, in the top 10 states for domestic violence against women,and in the top 10 states for infant mortality, among other things. Crimes against h*m*sexuals cannot be considered hate crimes either (again because of lack of hate crime legislation). Also, until about 10 years ago, marital r@pe was NOT A CRIME (as horrifying a thought as that is). We as a state have a long way to go.

South Carolina doesn't have to have it on its law books. It's a Federal Statute so SC will and HAS TO try it as a Hate Crime if it is deemed to be as such by investigators. If they don't, then they run risk of Federal Authorities jumping in and ripping the case out of their hands. Which we know that no prosecuter will want that to happeen.

[Fandango 1,439]

I wanna know what the diff will be if it's tried as a 'normal murder' vs a 'hate crime murder'

[one...two...tree 2,762]

South Carolina isn't deciding if this is a hate crime. South Carolina HAS NO hate crime legislation on its law books, so it can't charge someone with something it doesn't have (they will have to pursue normal murder charges against this perpetrator). I do not agree with this (I think we SHOULD have hate crime legislation), but that is where it stands right now. In SC we're last in education, in the top 10 states for domestic violence against women,and in the top 10 states for infant mortality, among other things. Crimes against h*m*sexuals cannot be considered hate crimes either (again because of lack of hate crime legislation). Also, until about 10 years ago, marital r@pe was NOT A CRIME (as horrifying a thought as that is). We as a state have a long way to go.

Unbelievable.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Generally, there are three types of hate-crime statutes. Two provide for punishment; the third type mandates only the collection of hate-crime data. One version defines a hate crime as a discrete offense and provides stiff punishment for the offense. Under Ohio's statute, for example, any person who commits menacing, aggravated menacing, criminal damage or criminal endangerment, criminal mischief, or telephone harassment "by reason of the race, color, religion, or national origin of another person or group of persons" is guilty of the hate crime termed ethnic intimidation (Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2927.12 [baldwin 1996]). The gravity of ethnic intimidation is always one degree higher than a base offense. For example, menacing is a misdemeanor of the fourth degree, but menacing based on ethnicity is a more serious offense, classified in Ohio as a misdemeanor of the third degree.

Another type of hate-crime law enhances punishment for certain offenses that are motivated by hate. In Wisconsin, for example, defendants who intentionally select their victims based at least in part on the victims' race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin, or ancestry are subject to more severe penalties than they would receive in the absence of such hate-based intent (Wis. Stat. § 939.645 [1995]). Thus in Wisconsin, for a class A misdemeanor based on hate, the maximum fine is $10,000, and the maximum period of imprisonment is two years in jail or prison (Wis. Stat. Ann. § 939.645(2)(a)), whereas an ordinary class A misdemeanor is punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or up to nine months in jail, or both (§ 939.51(3)(a)). For a class B misdemeanor, a less serious crime, the maximum fine is $1,000, and the maximum imprisonment is 90 days in jail. If the class B misdemeanor is a hate crime, the maximum fine is $10,000, and the maximum sentence is one year in jail.

A third type of hate-crime statute simply requires the collection of statistics. At the federal level, the Hate Crime Statistics Act of 1990 (Pub. L. No. 101-275, 104 Stat. 140 [28 U.S.C.A. § 534 (1990)]) requires the Justice Department to collect statistics on crimes that manifest evidence of prejudice. Data must be acquired for crimes based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity. The purpose of the act is to provide the data necessary for Congress to develop effective policies against hate-motivated violence, to raise public awareness, and to track hate-crime trends.

Laws against hate crimes might conflict with rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Generally, the First Amendment protects a citizen's right to the free expression of thoughts. However, the courts have ruled that First Amendment rights may give way to the greater public good. For example, there is no First Amendment protection for someone who falsely yells "Fire!" in a crowded theater, because such speech endangers the safety of others. Such expression might give rise to a disorderly conduct charge or similar charge. In determining the constitutionality of hate-crime legislation, one primary question is whether the prohibited speech deserves First Amendment protection.

http://lawbrain.com/wiki/Hate_Crime

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I wanna know what the diff will be if it's tried as a 'normal murder' vs a 'hate crime murder'

They would need to be both of the same race, I guess. Charlie Sheen held a knife to his wifes throat and that was obviously a crime of passion. I gave up trying to figure out these wing nuts who define this stuff.