Wordle: Hate Crime

Friday, December 19, 2008

Fighting Anti-Semitism Proves Too Costly

For those feeling a little more patriotic—a little more proud to be American—having cast your vote in last month's national election, please, don't read this. Cooper City, Florida, a town in Broward County of about 31,000 folks, whose motto is "Someplace Special", has had some ugliness—ugliness in the form of anti-Semitism—directed at its mayor and her staff this year. Hopefully, the folks at Family Circle magazine will catch wind of this story and re-assess whether Cooper City really is worthy of its Top 10 Best Towns for Families, unless of course the author of that list, Michael J. Weiss, wishes to specify that the list is for non-Jewish families. Oh, it's not that the good people of Cooper City haven't tried to beat down the hateful beast of anti-Semitism, they have. The problem, they've concluded, is that fighting their local anti-Semitism is simply too financially draining.

On January 19, 2008, the campaign manager for the town's Jewish mayor, Debby Eisinger, had a swastika scratched onto her vehicle. Eisinger’s campaign manager, Lori Green, who is also Jewish, said her car was parked beside her house in Embassy Lakes when the anti-Semitic act occurred. Green, whose husband's relatives are Holocaust survivors, reported the swastika to law enforcement when Lori discovered it, and the Broward County Sheriff's Office has since labeled the incident a hate crime.

That same month the Broward County Sheriff's Office started looking for evidence leading to those responsible for anti-Semitic postings about mayor Eisinger on the now-defunct website www.savecoopercity.blogspot.com, a hate blogsite that was registered to Cooper City Commissioner John Sims. The Sheriff's office considers those postings to also constitute a hate crime. In addition to local law enforcement, the townspeople also took action on the matter. According to South Florida Sun-Sentinel reporter, Elizabeth Baier, more than 1,900 Cooper City residents (10 percent of the city's registered voters) signed a petition for a special recall vote of Commissioner Sims, who has claimed no responsibility for the anti-Semitic postings at his (now dead) registered blogsite. However, as Ms. Baier reported in May, 2008 City Clerk Susan Bernard said the recall vote to remove Sims would require two special elections with a total price tag of $110,000. That amount proved too much to press for the recall vote. Ms. Baier quotes former Cooper City Commissioner, Elliot Kleiman, the man who spear-headed the recall committee and worked his butt off to collect the 1,900-plus signatures to move the recall vote forward, as saying, "Based on the economy and all the problems with city budgets, we just determined that it just wasn't worth it." This statement was made months before the sub-prime mortgage meltdown, the Wall Street bailout, and the plummeting stockmarkets; so, if Cooper City didn't have enough cash back in May for a recall vote, they certainly don't have it now.

Well, at least there is an active criminal investigation into the hate crime blog postings, right? Uh, no. According to Ms. Baier's article, the Broward County Sheriff's Office "have suspended the investigation until they get more information." The thing about police investigations is this: you don't get more information about a crime when you suspend the criminal investigation. Perhaps keeping the investigation active was also proving too costly.

For his part, Commissioner John Sims has been quoted as saying the recall petition effort "was a big joke," and he's started another blogsite where, speaking of himself in the third-person, he says, "John has the hands on experience to effectively address and resolve the current moral, legal and political issues facing Cooper City, and to make Cooper City more than 'Someplace Special' to live for our present residents and our future generations." Anti-Semitism, we hope Mr. Sims will agree, is no laughing matter for this generation or the next ones.

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Bashing Anti-gay Bashing Legislation

It's amazing to us how a few oppressed minority group members oppress others; über-amazing is when their words and actions work to oppress members of their own oppressed group. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), for example, did a second story in the summer of 2007 of an African-American man, H. K. Edgerton of Asheville, North Carolina, who had been working to preserve antebellum era memories and to bring back codified racism through his (thankfully now defunct) neo-Confederate group, Southern Heritage 411. For those not in the know about neo-Confederacy, it is a hate ideology with—not surprisingly—white supremacist and neo-Nazi ties. In an interview with the SPLC's Intelligence Report eight years ago, Edgerton said, "it was better to be an African in the Southland as a slave than to be free in Africa." According to Edgerton, a life of whippings, rape and dehumanizing servitude would be a preferred life—for him and other blacks—to one of autonomy, safety and respect. However you try to understand his mental gymnastics, the strange truth is that Edgerton is a black man in favor of black slavery.

Edgerton comes to mind when reading the latest from Ann Rostow, an Austin, Texas resident and lesbian columnist/writer for the San Francisco Bay Times, that city's gay, lesbian and transgendered newspaper. No, Rostow's not a black woman trying to bring back slavery, although her town has not one but two chapters of a known neo-Confederate hate group. Instead, in her November 20, 2008, Bay Times article, Rostow—sounding like a lesbian H.K. Edgerton—denigrates the efforts of those in her own community (and, by extension, those in the larger community) who are working to broaden the existing federal hate crime statute to include sexual orientation, gender, and gender identity as protected categories. Either callously unconcerned or oblivious to the fact that some in her community—gay men—are at a high relative risk of being victims of hate crimes, Rostow asserts that the gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered communities "cannot afford" to spend resources on strengthening the national hate crime law. Why not? Rostow offers up a platter of bizarre reasons.

First, reciting the tired, illogical line from other hate crime law opponents, Rostow writes:

"Hate crimes are despicable. But legislation won’t end them. Hate crime penalties are rarely enforced or charged where applicable."

Let's digest those first five words: "hate crimes are despicable, but...". You know what's coming when you hear a white person say, "I'm not racist, but..." or a non-Jew begin a sentence with, "I'm not anti-Semitic, but...". With that leadoff giveaway, it's no surprise Rostow continues on with the faulty logic that because hate crime legislation won't end hate crimes from occurring, then pushing to include sexual orientation as a protected category in proposed federal hate crime legislation is a waste of time and money. Using this same logic, we shouldn't have any laws including those banning murder, rape, robbery, or embezzlement, because the laws that we have now certainly have not stopped those crimes from being committed. Hers is a lame, baseless rationale for allowing people to be victimized because of their sexuality and one we've heard and commented on before.

While not the case in some areas of the United States, in Rostow's state of Texas it is true, as she points out, that hate crimes have been very rarely prosecuted as such, even obvious ones. However, that does not mean beefing up federal hate crime legislation should be ignored by anyone. Lack of appropriate prosecution and lack of appropriate punishment for hate crime offenders means that continued civil rights work—in the forms of activism and education—needs to happen so that hate crimes are seen as the society-destroying acts that they are by all areas of law enforcement. As we've shown, there is a trend in the right direction for voluntarily documenting and reporting hate crime incidents among the nation's law enforcement agencies. This has come about in no small part by citizens demanding that the police take these steps. What needs to happen now is for people to put pressure on District Attorneys and judges so that progress made by police will similarly occur in these other areas of law enforcement.

Strangely, Rostow asserts this reason for having the GLBT communities abandon efforts to push for a hate crime bill that will protect them: "A hate crime law will be the easiest, and one of the least useful, pieces of federal legislation that" the GLBT communities can advocate for. While it is likely true that once her former-governor vacates the White House in less than two months, a veto of an expanded hate crime amendment—should one make its way to President Obama's desk—will likely not occur. Still, Rostow forgets that the two co-sponsors of last year's failed hate crime bill—Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy and Oregon Senator Gordon H. Smith—are in no position to fight for the cause in 2009. Senator Kennedy has been struck with a terminal, cancerous brain tumor, and Senator Smith failed to win re-election last month. It remains to be seen who, if anyone, in Congress will draft an expanded version of the federal hate crime law (and if an updated amendment is to be written during Obama's presidency, we hope that it will include homelessness status as well as sexual orientation, gender and gender-identity). But, even if Rostow is correct—that fighting for passage of a new hate crime amendment would be easy—that is no reason to not fight for it. After all, in early 2008 in California polls showed that Proposition 8 would fail. The response from some in the gay community after those early polls were made public was lack-luster; homophobic forces then mobilized, and Prop 8 narrowly passed. Instead of being useless, we believe that passage of a federal hate crime law that includes sexual orientation would deliver an important message to homophobic America.

Instead of calling on more members from her community to fight for passage of a GLBT-protecting hate crime law, one that should have been passed long ago, Rostow states:
"You know what? A federal hate crime law is not our top priority as a community. And I am not appointing myself Director of the Gay Agenda, I am stating a fact."
Her own irony is lost on her here as Rostow, indeed, anoints herself as the Director of the Gay Agenda; and, she is stating opinion, not fact. Worse, though, is that she forgets a most important lesson in life: safety first. So, in Rostow's mind, what is more important than protecting the safety of every GLBT individual throughout the United States and transforming America by making it perfectly clear in the code of federal law that trolling for a gay victim is very, very wrong? Why that would be legalizing same-sex marriage in just one state (by working to repeal Proposition 8 in California) and working toward the repeal of the military's current closet mandate for homosexual service men and women.

We get it: Rostow's just being an American woman from Texas. Being American means ignoring evil (visit any Christian church in Europe and you'll no doubt see depictions of Satan, but you'd be hard pressed to find many churches in the United States that devote any stained glass to the devil). We Americans don't like looking at evil and hate crimes are acts of evil. Period. It's preferable to thumb through Modern Bride and fantisize about your same-sex wedding than it is to think that if you and your newly wedded spouse chose to visit Shenandoah National Park for a honeymoon stop you could wind up with your throats slit as happened to two lesbians—Julianne Marie Williams and Laura Winans—in 1996. In Rostow's America you could be legally wed to your same-sex partner and have your house burned down with anti-gay slurs scrawled on the home's only brick wall with no chance for added punishment for the perpetrator as happened recently to a young gay man in North Carolina. In Rostow's America as a homosexual you could openly serve in fighting America's immoral war in Iraq—one that began when we invaded a sovereign nation preemptively under false pretenses—and come home to be killed by some of your fellow soldiers or by an Evangelical Christian from another country simply because you are gay or lesbian, again with no added punishment for the perpetrator. During the Vietnam War era, America's youth protested that if they were too young to vote or drink, then they ought to be too young to be conscripted into the military (voting and drinking ages were lowered as a result). We think that today most gay and lesbian people would rightfully want homophobic violence specifically penalized before other, important civil rights are granted. You know, safety first.

We want to be clear here: Rostow paints an either-or agenda for the gay communities. It's either fighting for the repeal of the military's Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell policy and of California's Proposition 8, or it's fighting for adequate federal hate crime legislation. She makes no room for the GLBT communities to simultaneously fight for a multitude of worthy causes which we believe they can, and should, do. Among the top-ranking of those causes ought to be pushing the federal government to revise its hate crime law to include sexual orientation as a protected category. After all, safety first. However you try to understand her mental gymnastics, the strange truth is that Rostow is a gay woman in favor of having the gay community turn its back on hate crime legislation, legislation that would immediately stigmatize homophobia and penalize acts of domestic terrorism directed at the GLBT communities.

While H.K. Edgerton fails to see he is on the same side as the oppressor when it comes to resegregating the South, we hope that Ann Rostow learns soon that when it comes to gay hate crime legislation she is on the same side as some notable homophobes, such as the Reverend Ted Pike and Peter LaBarbera.

Saturday, November 15, 2008

The Week in Hate: November 9 - 15, 2008

Please read the other hate-related news stories at our This Date In Hate calendar.

Sunday November 9, 2008: In rural Sun, Louisiana (St. Tammany Parish), Raymond "Chuck" Foster, 44, allegedly shot and killed Cynthia C. Lynch, 43, of Tulsa, Oklahoma who was recruited via the Internet to participate in a Ku Klux Klan ceremony. Her murder took place after an argument erupted when she attempted to leave the ceremony after changing her mind about joining the Klan. Ms. Lynch was to have participated in the ceremony and then return to Oklahoma to recruit Klan members. Foster, who lives in Washington Parish and who is the leader of a local Klan chapter called Dixie Brotherhood, was charged with second-degree murder, and seven other Klan members, all from Washington Parish, were charged with trying to help conceal the murder. These Klan members were charged with obstruction of justice in the case: Random Hines, 27; Danielle Jones, 23; Frank Stafford, 21; Alicia Watkins, 23; Timothy Michael Watkins, 30; Andrew Yates, 20; and, Shane Foster, 20, the son of Chuck Foster. The victim's body was found dumped on a roadside the day after her murder. Ms. Lynch's murder underscores the violent nature of America's oldest domestic terrorist organization.

Monday November 10, 2008: The Greenville, North Carolina chapter of the NAACP demanded a "strong response and punishment" for the four North Carolina State University students who spray-painted "Let's shoot that N----r in the head", and, "Hang Obama by a noose" in the school's Free Expression Tunnel on election night. Other than the NAACP, no one is taking any action against the students: the Secret Service has deemed there was no threat to the President-elect; campus police have said no crime occurred (even though communicating a threat to kill someone is not protected free speech and the use of a racial slur would qualify the threats as a hate crime), and school administration is keeping secret the identities of the four students who admitted painting the threats. With the presidential election votes still being counted in Missouri, the nation, with the aid of North Carolina State University police and administration, has just lowered the bar for the safety of a nationally elected official by allowing someone to publicly call for the murder of our president-elect.

Monday November 10, 2008: Although expanded hate crime legislation failed last year in the United States, on this date the Hungarian Parliament passed two measures designed to curb hate crimes and hate speech. One law allows victims to civilly sue perpetrators for engaging in degrading or intimidating behavior directed toward a person or a group of people based on the victims' nationality, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation. The other law prohibits hate speech directed at someone based on their nationality, ethnicity, religion and sexual orientation, speech that is designed to "incite hatred of a group of people."

Wednesday November 12, 2008: Alexander Edward Ou, 20, of Rochester, Minnesota, who was charged out of the Olmsted District Court with gross misdemeanor fourth-degree assault motivated by bias (a hate crime) for allegedly assaulting a 48-year-old man early on June 6th because of the man's race, was scheduled for an evidentiary hearing. Alexander's brother, Anthony Shieha Ou, 17, was been charged out of the Olmsted District Juvenile Court with the same crime.

Wednesday November 12, 2008: In Poplarville, Mississippi, former Nicholls State University student, Dyron Hart, 19, of Poplarville, is alleged to have sent, via Facebook, black students at Nicholls State University in Thibodaux, Louisiana, Louisiana State University, the University of Mississippi, and the University of Alabama, a message stating he planned to kill 3,000 people, including them, following Barack Obama’s presidential victory on November 5, 2008. Hart, who is himself African-American but who was posing as a white man when he sent the emails and who was a Nicholls State University football hopeful, was arrested by FBI agents on November 12, 2008. If convicted, the 6-foot-3-inch tall, 350-pound man, could receive up to five years in prison, a $250,000 fine, and three years of supervised release if convicted.

Thursday November 13, 2008: On the campus of North Carolina State University over 500 people attended a rally to demonstrate opposition to the life-threatening and racist graffiti written by four known, but unidentified N.C. State students. The four spray-painted "Let's shoot that N----r in the head", and, "Hang Obama by a noose" in the school's Free Expression Tunnel on election night.

Friday November 14, 2008: In Syracuse, New York, Moses Cannon, 20, of Syracuse, was shot and killed while sitting in a car with his 18-year-old brother, Mark, allegedly by Dwight R. DeLee, 20, also from Syracuse, because DeLee did not like that Moses was openly gay. Police have charged DeLee, who allegedly left a party where anti-gay slurs were being directed at the Cannon brothers to get the murder weapon, with second-degree murder. Mark Cannon was slightly injured in the lethal anti-gay attack of his brother.



Saturday, November 8, 2008

The 2008 Presidential Election Unleashes Rage

Politics is ugly. This presidential season, it got uglier. Some Americans responded to the first seriously viable black presidential candidate with hate speech; others responded by taking hate-fueled action, or at least by making plans to do so. In West Hollywood, California, ChadMichael Morrisette hung in effigy the likeness of vice-presidential hopeful, Sarah Palin. A life-size doll of presidential candidate John McCain sitting in a chimney surrounded by paper flames was perched nearby. The real GOP presidential candidate was booed by some of his own supporters when he announced at a campaign trail stop that Barack Obama is someone "you do not have to be scared of", a statement apparently the Arizona senator felt he had to make to quell media buzz about McCain-Palin rally attendees shouting "Kill him" and "terrorist" (referring to Obama), about GOP supporters making Barack Obama monkey dolls, about news reports of "Obama for President" signs being stolen from the lawns of his supporters or vandalized with racial slurs, and about vehicles sporting "Obama '08" bumper stickers being vandalized with racist graffiti. Unlike the issue of how to turn our failing economy around, Jesse Jackson's oft-quoted remark that in the United States "race matters" was hardly debatable this national election season.

From the beginning of his bid for the White House, during the Democratic primaries, Barack Obama's ground game team had been subjected to overtly hostile—and racist—remarks from the public. They would never vote for a n----r, some registered voters told Obama volunteers. Barack Obama, who is Christian and a member of the United Church of Christ in Chicago, was repeatedly and erroneously called a Muslim by some detractors, and the 28 million DVD distribution two months before the election by at least 70 newspapers in swing states (such as the Columbus Dispatch in Ohio) of the hate-filled propaganda piece titled Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West no doubt fueled Islamophobia and Obamophobia. Additionally, hate-filled emails found their way into the inboxes of Obama supporters; in at least one case, the FBI was contacted. One Republican blogger posted a poster of Barack Obama next to a noose with the headline that read: "Asphyxiation/The Fucking Solution." Evangelical minister Steve Foss, along with Homer Owen, spammed folks with a dire warning about how evil Barack Obama is. (Owen is an Evangelical guy who hawks born-again intolerance—and lip balm and soap—at his strange website, all in the name of Christ, of course). Although Foss said God was speaking to him about Obama and that it was God who was warning him about an Obama victory—Foss thereby disowning himself from his own hatred and throwing God under the bus at the same time—we predict that in four more years another right-wing Evangelical Christian will read tea leaves, hear God's voice, or stumble across something in the Bible that states, to them, that the next Democratic presidential candidate is—like Michael Dukakis, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and now Barack Obama—someone akin to the anti-Christ. As revelations from God go, pitching a Democratic presidential candidate as demonic is a pretty tired and overworked one.

Receiving less media attention, but occurring against the same history-making presidential election backdrop, was the Duval County Florida School Board's 5-2 vote along racial lines to retain the name of Nathan Bedford Forrest High School, this despite the facts that (a) Nathan Bedford Forrest (to quote Brenda Priestly Jackson, one of the two black board members who voted for a school name-change) "was a terrorist and racist" (Forrest was a member of the Ku Klux Klan) and (b) the majority of today's Nathan Bedford Forrest High School students are black.

Then there were the hate-crime incidents. In Denver in late August, four white men were arrested for plotting to assassinate Barack Obama when he was to give his party nomination acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention. Next, within weeks of the election two white supremacistsDaniel Cowart, 20, of Bells, Tennessee and Paul Schlesselman, 18, of West Helena, Arkansas—were held without bond in Tennessee after authorities alleged that the pair had planned to rob a Tennesse gun store which was to supply the men with the means to carry out a killing spree against African-Americans. According to law enforcement officials, the two white supremacists also planned to assassinate Barack Obama while wearing white tuxedos and black top hats. On election day in South Ogden, Utah, an African-American family hung the American flag from their home after returning from the polling station where they had worked; within a half an hour, their flag had been set ablaze.

Such acts were not isolated to states where John McCain posted election-night victories either. In Springfield, Massachusetts, the Macedonia Church of God in Christ was suspiciously burned to the ground just hours after Barack Obama's victory speech in Chicago's Grant Park. Just hours before that, on Staten Island, a black Muslim teen was beaten while walking home by four white men apparently enraged that a black man had won the presidential election. Although they yelled no racial slurs—a hallmark sign of a race-based hate crime—the four angry white men yelled "Obama" as they descended upon their African-born victim with a baseball bat, and police ruled the unprovoked attack was, indeed, a hate crime. Meanwhile, at North Carolina State University on election night four students there spray-painted violent, racist messages about Barack Obama: one read, "Let's shoot that N----r in the head" and the other said, "Hang Obama by a noose." True to slave-state tradition, the administration has protected the students. According to WRAL Channel 5, the CBS television affiliate in Raleigh, the school's administration has not released the names of the students, and it said the four students will not be charged with a hate crime. For its part, the NAACP has called for N.C. State to expel the four. What would also be appropriate would be for the case to be turned over to the FBI for criminal investigation and prosecution. Since the identities of the racist spray-painters have been cloaked by the school's administration, we're guessing that the incident must be leaving N.C. State's black students with questions about their own safety on campus.

Hate crime incidents were also not limited to election night. On November 5, 2008, in Poplarville, Mississippi, former Nicholls State University student, Dyron Hart, 19, of Poplarville, is alleged to have sent, via Facebook, black students at Nicholls State University in Thibodaux, Louisiana, Louisiana State University, the University of Mississippi, and the University of Alabama, a message stating he planned to kill 3,000 people, including them. The 6-foot-3-inch tall, 350-pound Hart, who is himself African-American but who was posing as a white man when he sent the emails and who was a Nicholls State University football hopeful in the spring of 2008, was arrested by FBI agents. He is said to have confessed to sending the emails in order to get a "reaction." Two days after the election in Hardwick Township, New Jersey, in Warren County, an African-American man discovered that someone had burned a six-foot tall cross on his yard. He discovered the cross, which was near his pro-Obama banner that had also been deliberately charred, when taking his eight-year-old daughter to school.

Hate crime incidents this presidential election season were also not limited to targeting blacks. The unleashed racism brought about by an African-American man's run for the White House also unleased other forms of hatred. In La Qunita, California, Robert Sylk, the only Jewish candidate running for the City Council, had one of his political lawn signs stolen and vandalized—with a swastika. Then there was the California gay hate-crime assault: a man wearing a political button against "Proposition 8", which denies gay/lesbian couples the right to become legally married in that state, was attacked by a man who first directed a gay slur at his victim. Poignently, the attacker allegedly used a pro-Proposition 8 lawn sign as a weapon with which he is said to have beaten his victim. In Irvine, California, a City Council candidate who is Muslim, Todd Gallinger, received a death threat on October 7, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Some say that John McCain and Sarah Palin fueled their base's race-based emotions by attempting to characterize Barack Obama as someone who "pals around with terrorists" (to quote Ms. Palin) and someone who does not think like "we" do. London Telegraph journalist Tim Shipman reported that Ms. Palin's attacks on Barack Obama's character "provoked a near lynch mob atmosphere at her rallies, with supporters yelling 'terrorist' and 'kill him' until the McCain campaign ordered her to tone down the rhetoric." Mr. Shipman also wrote: "Sarah Palin's attacks on Barack Obama's patriotism provoked a spike in death threats against the future president, Secret Service agents revealed during the final weeks of the campaign." One thing is clear, the McCain-Palin attacks failed them: pre- and post-election polls showed that members of the public—Republicans and Democrats—did not care for the GOP's negative campaign stating that it went too far.

All of this election hatred is illuminating and it leads to two conclusions. One is that racism (and other forms of hatred) isn't killed off easily, even with a bi-racial (and self-identified African-American) president-elect. The other is that for the nation to continue to make civil rights gains—that is, for tolerance to trump intolerance—hate crimes must be dealt with swiftly and decisively by every level of the criminal justice system.

Sunday, July 20, 2008

Gaslighting Northport, Alabama

In the early morning hours on July 14, 2008 in Northport, Alabama, which bills itself as an All-American City (no immigrants allowed?), a number of residents of the Quail Ridge Mobile Home Park—which is nestled between Harper Road and Park West Drivehad their vehicles, homes and yards vandalized with painted racial slurs and the letters “KKK”. The Unsolved Hate Crimes webpage of the Northport Police Department's website described the attack on the mixed-race trailer park community which sits adjacent to the Tuscaloosa Regional Airport in detail:

"Eight different Hate Crime Acts were reported...Six of the victims were Black and two were Hispanic. The following egregious acts were reported: One victim found nine bullet holes in her vehicle, the lettering 'KKK' painted on the left side of her mobile home from front to rear, the victim's vehicle was also keyed. A second victim had his tires cut. A third victim had 'KKK' painted on the side of her residence, and the racial slur, 'I hate N.......' painted on the front. A fourth victim had the racial slur, 'N.......' painted on her home. A fifth victim had the windows to his vehicles knocked out with large concrete blocks and 'KKK' painted in red on the side of his vehicle. A sixth victim had "KKK" painted on the side of her trailer and the same painted in the street in front of her residence. A seventh victim had the following racial slur painted on the hood of her vehicle, 'I hate N.......' The same was also painted on the south side of the victim's residence. An eighth victim had her tires cut.

Additionally, there was one White female who reported that small holes had been poked in the front and rear of her trailer.

The actual offenses ranged from Shooting into an Unoccupied Vehicle to Criminal Mischief in the First Degree."

The work of the KKK? Maybe. The Klan has been active in Alabama for well over a hundred years, and while the Southern Poverty Law Center has reported no specific Klan groups active for years in Tuscaloosa County, where Northport is located, there are certainly chapters of the KKK that act statewide; and, the county seat, nearby Tuscaloosa, has an active white racist hate group. Regardless of whether the culprits are members of a hate group or not, the poor folks at Quail Ridge are no strangers to hate crimes. In October, 2006, when Northport was preparing for its annual Kentuck Festival, the Northport Police were dealing with hate crime acts at and near the trailer park. According to the police's webpage, these hate crimes—referred to collectively as "Incident 1"—have yet to be solved. The October, 2006, hate crimes involved the burning of a Mexican flag, slashed tires, burned crosses, and racist comments and symbols (including the letters "KKK" and swastikas) painted on homes.

Perhaps because the Northport Police Chief, Robert W. Green, is African-American, law enforcement in the west-central Alabama town of about 21,000 appeared very prepared to solve the recent hate crimes. From their Unsolved Hate Crimes webpage:

"We have intensified our efforts and we have also received the valuable assistance of the FBI. Additionally, a $12,000 reward is being offered for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those parties who were responsible for these Hate Crime Acts.

Anyone with any information regarding the Hate Crime Activity at Quail Ridge Mobile Home Park should contact one of the following: The Northport Police Department's Criminal Investigation Division at: (205) 333-3008; Crime Stoppers at : (205)752-STOP or the FBI at (205) 758-4277"

The Quail Ridge hate crimes did not go unnoticed by the media. The Tuscaloosa News reported the crimes, including an ominous photo of Antate Wilder's SUV which was shot full of bullets among other photos of the crimes. Tuscaloosa News staff writer, Stephanie Taylor, noted that an anonymous person had donated $10,000 for reward money for the arrest and conviction of the perpetrator(s). Rightfully, the Northport police immediately began its investigation; and, since intimidating someone at their home because of their race also violates the federal civil rights law, the local police were correct to involve the FBI. Northport Mayor Harvey Fretwell promised the perpetrators would be brought to justice at a press conference attended by Mr. Charles Dorsey, the head of Tuscaloosa's FBI office. An editoral said those responsible for the Quail Ridge attacks must be dangerous sociopaths; it called for incarcerating the perpetrators. It was the kind of community chorus one wants to hear after a hate crime has been committed. The kind of chorus that leads to appropriate action.

Probably because of the combination of quick police responsiveness, adequate press coverage of the crimes, appropriate outcry from the community, and a sweet reward, results came swiftly. The Northport police announced on July 18, 2008, the arrest of a 15-year-old boy in the hate crime attack on the mobile home park; they also arrested a 17-year-old the following day. The 15-year-old suspect was charged with two felony counts of Criminal Mischief, seven misdemeanor counts of Criminal Mischief, and one felony count of Shooting into an Unoccupied Vehicle. The 17-year-old male was charged with 3rd Degree Criminal Mischief. The police did not release their names to the public, because the pair were charged as juveniles.

But then a funny thing happened in the town comprised of 26% Black folks and 2% Hispanics, the town with the black police chief.

The hate crime part of the hate crimes perpetrated against eight persons of color at the Quail Ridge Moble Home Park vanished. Specifically, Tuscaloosa News staff writer, Steve Reeves, reported:
"[Chief of Police] Green said, however, that the juvenile arrested Thursday has not been charged under hate crime statutes. He said that came under federal law and that the FBI, which helped with the investigation, indicated that it would not apply."
Reeves was not misreporting; NBC13's Jon Paepcke also said the town will not file hate crime charges against the perpetrators and that the FBI is not pursuing the case. FBI agent Dorsey's appearance at the mayor's press conference days before the arrests was, apparently, just window-dressing, a way to kill a few hours on the tax-payer's dime. Guess there was nothing really needing attention at the Tuscaloosa FBI office, so what the hell, might as well show up at the Northport mayor's press conference.

In addition to law enforcement changing the reality of what really occurred at Quail Ridge, some in the media were changing the reality of what occurred also: suddenly a blatant, race-based series of hate crimes directed at eight people of color was being called something else. Jon Paepcke reported the letters "KKK" and the phrase "I hate Niggers" that were scrawled at the trailer park were mere "racial undertones." Specifically, Paepcke wrote on the NBC13.com website whose banner reads "ACCURACY MATTERS":

"Despite the racial undertones of the graffiti, Northport police said Friday [July 18, 2008] the juveniles don’t face hate crime charges."

Let's remind Paepcke of Merriam-Webster's definition of the word undertone: "a low or subdued utterance." Let's remind him also that KKK stands for Ku Klux Klan, the oldest domestic terrorist group in America. Let's remind him that factions of the Klan have been persecuting African-Americans since its beginnings. Since when have KKK and N-word graffiti ever been subdued utterances, Jon Paepcke?

Should the hate crime victims here be feeling had and mad? Yes, of course. Failing to file hate crime charges against someone who allegedly slathers a neighborhood with racist graffiti, who allegedly shoots bullet holes in the vehicle of an African-American, and allegedly damages vehicles while on a racist crime spree is absolutely inexcusable. Mayor Fretwell should insist hate crime charges be filed against the two teenagers arrested or else ask police chief Green to tender his immediate resignation (or else be fired). But let's be real: when was the last time a white mayor demanded of a black police chief to file hate crime charges because of attacks specifically targeting black and Hispanic folks?
What about the tipster, the person who provided the police with information that led to the arrests of the two alleged offenders, should this person be feeling bad? Absolutely not, this person is a silent hero who no doubt took some personal risk coming forward to provide information to the police about a hateful person who owns and shoots a gun. But, should this person be feeling had? Yes, of course. Steve Reeves reported:

"Police received a tip that led to the first boy’s arrest immediately after announcing a $12,000 reward in the case Wednesday [July 16, 2008], [police chief] Green said. Payment of the reward is contingent upon a conviction.... Green was concerned that the case would be difficult to solve [get a conviction] because none of the residents of the mobile home park, which is off of Harper Road, near the Tuscaloosa Regional Airport, saw or heard anything that night."

Translation to the tipster and also to anyone else in that community who might want to trust the genuiness of the Northport police: thanks for the information, it led us to make two arrests which make us look good, but we aren't going to bother to get the forensic evidence left by the bullets and the bullet holes, so we won't get a conviction, because the pair we arrested don't have to testify against themselves and we have no eyewitnesses to testify against them, and so you won't get your reward money. Now go away.

Were the victims set-up to believe that its city actually cares about them and about vigorously combatting hate crimes when in fact that isn't the case? Yes. Was the tipster set-up to place himself/herself in some jeopardy with the false promise of a reward? Yes. Will the secrecy of the juvenile defendants' identities prevent the public from knowing who exactly has been accused; and what, if any, punishment might come their way for placing in fear an entire community? Of course. Without the ability of the media and the public to be able to track the outcome of the legal case against the two accused of the hate-crimes-not-being-pursued-as-hate-crimes, no one will know if any measure of justice will be served here. For sure injustice has already occurred: unmistakable hate crimes perpetrated against eight good folks at the Quail Ridge Moble Home Park happened, and no hate crime charges—federal or state—will ever be brought against the two teens arrested. For the victims and the larger community, that's a psychological injustice as well as a legal one.

Aside from the "these-hate-crimes-aren't-really-hate-crimes" lie being now voiced by the police chief, let's not forget another lie in all of this. As reported by The Tuscaloosa News and NBC13 television, Northport Police Chief Robert W. Green communicated to the public that hate crime laws are federal, not state, laws. His words lead one to falsely conclude he has no power, no authority, to press hate crime charges against the two teens recently arrested, or anyone else for that matter. Green's words erroneously suggest only the FBI could do that. This is a lie, because, of course, a police chief knows better. Police chiefs in Alabama know that Alabama has a hate crime statute which covers race-based crimes, regardless of the age or other demographic features of an alleged assailant. This would be Code of Alabama § 13A-5-13, chief Green, which is part of a larger document you may want to familiarize yourself with. Words and inaction like that of police chief Green—words and inaction that allow hate to flourish in his community on his watch—have been called an inaction of evil by one famous social psychologist who has studied similar forms of abdication of responsibility. That's a fair assessment, but there's another way to describe chief Green's inaction and the words of some in the media.

Thursday, June 26, 2008

One Man's Quest to Quell Free Speech

"Far-left nuts" of Toledo, Ohio beware: should you publicly voice your opposition to the war in Iraq, voice your support for universal health care, or dare to criticize former Lucas County (Ohio) Republican Party chairman turned federal inmate, Tom Noe, you could be hearing from Michael Edward Coon, the 52-year-old white, Christian owner of Holland Benefits Group, a 24-year-old employee benefits consulting firm based in Ohio. If you’re retired surgeon Dr. S. Amjad Hussain, a University of Toledo trustee and guest editorial writer for The Toledo Blade, you already have heard from Coon who lives in the Point Place section of Toledo.

Coon was arraigned in Maumee Municipal Court Monday June 23, 2008, on three counts of felony ethnic intimidation (that’s Ohio’s kindly name for a hate crime) for allegedly sending "hate emails" to Dr. Hussain in apparent response to Dr. Hussain’s published editorials in The Toledo Blade. Coldly, some of the emails were sent after Dr. Hussain was the victim of a violent home invasion where he was sprayed with mace and pistol-whipped; and, heartlessly, Coon’s emails expressed delight in that crime. So much for the Golden Rule of Christianity. It seems Coon has been on a one-man campaign to quell the free speech of Toledo residents whose political viewpoints differ from his. He firmly supports the war in Iraq and is opposed to universal health care. Coon has admitted he has telephoned people who have publicly shared sociopolitical viewpoints different from his own—persons who have had their letters to the editor published in The Toledo Blade—and he has said that these people "are far-left nuts." Of course if he’s checked opinion polls lately, Coon will see that most Americans (even many self-described Christians like himself) are disappointed with our President’s performance in office, are against the war in Iraq (like Pakistani-born Dr. Hussain), and are desperately hungry for something other than our current health care system. We hope Coon has good telephone and internet service plans; he's got a lot of Toledo residents to contact.

According to the meticulous reporting of Toledo Blade staff writer, Kate Giammarise, since Coon’s hate-crime arrest, others have come forward to say that they have received harassing, scary telephone calls from Coon. One woman said she changed her telephone number to an unlisted one after Coon's menacing calls to her home following her letters to the editor in the Toledo Blade criticizing Tom Noe for orchestrating the investor-theft, money-laundering scheme now known as Coingate, and criticizing the war in Iraq. So frightened was this woman after Coon's telephone calls that she also contacted the police.

In his defense about his charges, Coon has said that he never threatened or intimidated Dr. Hussain who is Muslim. Talking about himself in the third-person, Coon said: "Coon is not a psycho, Coon is an American patriot." Coon may not be psycho, but Coon may have crossed the line from constitutionally protected free speech to the kind considered criminal--the kind that threatens and intimidates--because one email sent from Coon to Dr. Hussain, quoted from Toledo’s NBC affiliate, is said to have contained the following words:
"...Beheading Islamists will be as fun as a turkey shoot. You are in my sights!!!"
Even without the national backdrop of increased violent crimes committed against Muslims and those perceived to be either Muslim or from the Middle East since the 9-11 terroristic attacks, such a statement can hardly be viewed as free speech, can it? "Beheading Islamists" followed by "turkey shoot" followed by "You are in my sights": how could that be considered free speech? How could that not be seen as criminal intimidation based on religious hatred? Coon is also reported to have communicated to Dr. Hussain:
"frightened scared immigrants like you have it coming big time."
Coon has said he posed "zero threat" to Dr. Hussain, which of course a jury will decide. One thing is for sure, we wouldn't want to take our chances dealing with a man with a violent past, such as Coon. As Ms. Giammarise wrote:

"in 2002, Coon pleaded no contest and was found guilty in Lucas County Common Pleas Court to aggravated assault, and attempted intimidation of a crime victim or witness. The charges stem from Coon's attack on a 19-year-old neighbor with a bat, lacerating his head and breaking the young man's left arm, according to a police report."

Wow, a then 46-year-old businessman taking a baseball bat to the body of a 19-year-old neighbor. So much for the Christian tenet Love Thy Neighbor. In that 2002 case, Coon initially pleaded Not Guilty, but it appears that on December 10, 2001, he entered a new plea of Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity, and was referred the following day for a psychiatric evaluation. The case was then scheduled for trial on January 3, 2002, but on that date there was a question about Coon's competence to stand trial. So, the case was postponed until January 8, 2002, at which time Coon changed his plea again; he entered his No Contest plea for the two fourth-degree felony charges, thus avoiding trial. A month later Coon was sentenced. He was ordered to pay a $2,500 fine, plus restitution and court costs, he was ordered to three years of probation (though in reality he was off probation after two years), and he was ordered to have no contact with the victim. Pleading No Contest to a violent criminal act is a savvy thing to do for a person with substantial financial assets, by the way, because evidence from a criminal court case that has a No Contest finding cannot be used against a defendant in a civil lawsuit. And it appears Coon has assets.

According to Ohiobiz.com, Coon’s Holland Benefits Group, a company with fewer than five employees, rakes in between $500,000 and $1,000,000 in annual revenue. You’d think with a business that lucrative, Coon would be too busy to track down and contact those whose sociopolitical beliefs differ from his own. Or, you'd think that Coon could see an obvious reality and maybe say to himself: Coon's not fighting in war-torn Iraq, Coon has a cushy white-collar lifestyle. You'd think he'd grasp that clear reality and that it would have motivated him to want to protect and keep his sweet CEO lifestyle, a lifestyle likely flushed down the toilet, if convicted as charged, just as the cushy lifestyle of Republican money-launderer Thomas W. Noe was flushed after he was convicted of laundering more than $45,000 to President Bush’s 2004 presidential campaign. (Noe was convicted in November, 2006, of 29 felonies in Ohio, and was sentenced to 18 years in state prison, which is to be served following his 27-month federal prison term. Noe, 53, is serving his federal prison term at The Federal Correctional Institution (FCI) - Low in Coleman, Florida, and he is expected to complete his federal prison term on October 27, 2008).

Detective Mark Woodruff of the Lucas County Sheriff's Department, who is the chief investigator in the Coon case, said, "There's a line somewhere out there between freedom of speech and criminal conduct" and police believe that line was crossed in the emails to Dr. Hussain. Regarding the accusations against him and his pending trial, Coon has said defiantly:

"We'll see if 12 real Americans will think this guy was abused, harassed, or intimidated. I can't wait to get to trial."

Neither can we, Coon, neither can we.

Coon is scheduled to appear in court July 3, 2008. In the meantime, he has been barred from having any contact with Dr. Hussain and he has also been barred from entering any building where Dr. Hussain is, according to a civil protection order issued by Lucas County Common Pleas Judge James Jensen on June 24, 2008.

Sunday, May 25, 2008

Anatomy of a Hate Crime (Part Three)

Perhaps no other domestic social issue divides the two major political parties more than hate crimes and hate crime legislation. You'd be hard-pressed to find an issue with such consistent party-divided voting records as the ones that occur regarding hate crime legislation. In 2000, for instance, the U.S. Senate voted on the "Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2000", a hate crime amendment (S. Amdt. 3473) meant to beef up an already existing federal hate crime law sponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy. The amendment vote had 44 of 45 Democrats voting for the measure (only West Virginia's Robert Byrd opposed it) whereas only 13 of 55 Republicans voted for it (one Republican abstained). The amendment fell short by three votes to move it closer toward passage. A second attempt to strengthen hate crime laws was made in 2002. That year the Senate voted on the "Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001", and like the Senate's vote in 2000, the outcome was highly partisan. Only one Democrat (South Dakota's Tom Daschle) voted against it; and, only four Republicans voted for it. Three Republicans abstained and the measure was defeated (this time by six votes).

As the Democrats were in the past with racial desegregation legislation, they appear again to be in a tug-of-war with Republicans over one of today's important civil rights issues: hate crime legislation. For example, President Bush threatened last year to veto a hate crimes bill that might have gone to his desk had it been passed by Congress. That would have been only Bush's third veto as President; but, the measure did not make it to his desk, because it was suffocated when it was connected to an unpopular Iraqi War funding bill. It doesn't take a genius to predict that a federal law both bolstering aid to local law enforcement in their efforts to go after hate crime offenders and including sexual orientation as a protected category will pass once the Democrats have control of both the White House and the Congress. Until then, local law enforcement agencies will struggle to investigate and prosecute hate crimes, and elected Republicans (except freshman Oregon senator Gordon H. Smith and a few others) will likely continue to vote against and to slander hate crime legislation as they have done repeatedly.

In two previous blogs (Anatomy of a Hate Crime, Parts One & Two) I have reported on the national social climate surrounding one recent hate crime allegation out of Champaign, Illinois. It is a case involving an alleged gay bashing of a University of Illinois student, Steven Velasquez, that saw little media coverage; yet, even with scant media attention the internet was abuzz, in places, about the allegation. As I initially blogged getting answers to questions about the Champaign, Illinois hate crime allegation has proved difficult, although I learned the accused, Brett Vanasdlen (sometimes spelled VanAsdlen), was a star college baseball player at Parkland College where he is a freshman. While the legal end to this story is not yet in sight (the next court date is July 1, 2008), Brett Vanasdlen was temporarily kicked off of the baseball team following his arrest in early April, though his coach has said he expects Vanasdlen to be back in uniform by next season. (The Parkland College Cobras are fairing quite well without Vanasdlen, losing just 9 of the 27 games they played since he was removed from the team). If convicted of the hate crime he has been charged with (a fourth degree felony) Vanasdlen could do jail time.

Since initially blogging about the Vanasdlen case, where I have stressed that but for the angle and force of a single punch or shove a hate crime assault could become a hate crime murder, other hate crime head-injury victims have had their lives forever changed, yet punishment has not followed. Hate-based assaults targeting gay men have become so common in Boston, Massachusetts recently that the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office has hired a victim's advocate for sexual minority hate crime victims to help them as their legal cases navigate their way from indictment to trial or plea agreement.

Although Boston-area victims and their families have the needed support from their local D.A.'s office, nearly all other Americans are much less fortunate. Take, for example, the March 2, 2008, race-based hate crime murder of a young black man in Los Angeles, Jamiel Shaw, Jr., 17, a star football player at his high school. Shaw's family has had less than an empathic response from the L.A. D.A.'s office which has thus far refused to file a hate crime charge against the Latino man they believe is responsible for gunning down the teenage athlete solely because of his race. Shaw's parents have been pressing the D.A.'s office to file such a charge and they have been pushing for a law that would allow L.A. police to ask criminal suspects about their immigration status (Shaw's alleged killer is an illegal alien who had previously been jailed and had his immigration status been uncovered while incarcerated, Jamiel Shaw, Jr. would be alive today). Here is an example of how victims of hate crimes are sometimes treated by those whose job it is to prosecute criminals as reported by the Associated Press on May 13:

The rift between the Shaws and the district attorney's office was exposed last week when Jamiel Shaw Sr., 47, and his ex-wife Anita Shaw, 43, met with District Attorney Steve Cooley to complain about Michele Hanisee, the prosecutor on the case. Jamiel Shaw said Hanisee pressured him to stop pushing for the law and threatened to depict their son as a gang member unless they dropped demands that she prosecute the case as a hate crime.

Depict Jamiel Shaw Jr., as a gang member? Ah, prosecutorial discretion. It reminds one of Ohio artist Jenny Holzer's famous phrase: the abuse of power should come as no surprise. At least Hanisee was booted off as prosecutor after the Shaws' complaints, so perhaps Jamiel's parents will have an ally in the newly-appointed D.A. Although some on the outer fringes of sociopolitical conservatism have attempted to use Shaw's murder for an opportunity to bellow an anti-illegal immigration song (which is really a racist, anti-Latino song) instead of focusing on what the tragedy appears to be by many--yet another hate crime murder of an African-American man in the United States--these same conservatives go silent when immigrants who happen to be white evangelical Christians commit hate crimes against homosexuals. Just as nativists are trying to re-paint Jamiel Shaw Jr.'s senseless hate crime murder into something it isn't for sociopolitical gain, some anti-gay activists and a few white nationalists (such as the like-minded former Ku Klux Klan head, David Duke) are trying to alter the reality of the Vanasdlen-Velasquez hate crime assault case. In doing so the blogsite, DailyKos, (where this blog was initially posted) has been called a "hate site" by one of Brett Vanasdlen's cheerleaders, Peter LaBarbera (never mind that DailyKos is featured on the website blogroll of one of the nation's hardest-working anti-hate organizations, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and never mind that that immensely respected anti-hate organization has exposed Peter LaBarbera for the poisonous man that he is).

As I've said in previous blogs, the support for the accused, Brett Vanasdlen, has been loud. However, some of his supporters have gone beyond merely supporting him. They've attacked the concept of hate crimes and the need for hate crime laws (and they like to put the words hate crimes in quotes as if to pretend these crimes do not exist), and in doing so they have used Brett Vanasdlen as a pawn for their cause. With groundless accusations from Ronalee Vanasdlen, Brett's mother, they have accused the Champaign, Illinois police department of "trumping up" a hate crime charge against Brett to meet some sort of hate crime arrest quota. (Seriously, who's heard of such a thing: purposefully increasing hate crime arrests would likely only leave people with the perception that the town is unfriendly and steer people away from it, and no police chief who wants to keep his or her job would dare speak such patently illegal nonsense let alone make it policy). With the assistance of his mother, they've focused on the alleged assailant's religion claiming the Champaign, Illinois hate crime assault case is about religious freedom and not about a case of homophobia-fueled violence as the police allege. Brett's mother calls herself and her son "conservative Christians" and she reported that the Vanasdlens attend an off-label Christian church in Brett's small Illinois hometown of Minooka. A little digging reveals that their church is a Rapture-focused evangelical one that declares its believing members are "holy" and "saints". That's the kind of we're-better-than-you arrogance needed to fertilize a hate crime, and the kind of arrogance that can tarnish all humble Christians with a bad name. Brazenly, a few self-identified Christians have posted accusations that the victim in the case, Steven Velasquez, is trying to forward some type of homosexual agenda.

This latter assertion is cruel and has nothing to do with the type of Christianity that many Americans practice--including many Evangelical Christians such as Jimmy and Rosalyn Carter--the type where bearing false witness against someone is forbidden by God. The cruel accusation is like asserting that when a female rape victim goes to court to testify, she is doing so because she has some feminist axe to grind, and not because she wants to see justice prevail. It's a hideous character-smearing claim made about Steven Velasquez with no basis in fact made all the more grotesque given that the only agenda that is being forwarded in the Vanasdlen-Velasquez case is the one by anti-hate crime activists and anti-gay activists. They have claimed that "the hateful homosexual spin machine" is running at full-tilt activism (and they talk like DailyKos is one cog in that machine), simply because two gay-themed blogsites--Box Turtle Bulletin and 2015place--have mentioned the hate crime allegation (in addition to my diaries). In reality the opposite is true: only the anti-hate crime/anti-gay folks are calling for action. They are demanding that the felony hate crime charge against Brett Vanasdlen be dropped (which, prior to a finding of fact, they have determined is "bogus"), and they have called for their supporters to make telephone calls to the D.A.'s office not to influence the outcome of the legal process, but to kill it. Anti-hate crime activist and notorious anti-Semite, Reverend Ted Pike, has urged his whacky following to call the Champaign, Illinois mayor and police chief to protest Brett Vanasdlen's arrest. Their activism suggests they want more than hate crime legislation overturned; it suggests they want religious-based gay bashings made legal. So much for Brett Vanasdlen's constitutional right to a trial and Steven Velasquez's constitutional right to the pursuit of happiness.

What has also occurred since Brett Vanasdlen's first pre-trial hearing (held on May 6th) is that Brett's mother, Ronalee, injected herself smack into the middle of her son's hate crime story by proclaiming "We're being persecuted" (although she was not at the alleged crime scene and, as such, she has been charged with no wrongdoing). I can find no comments about the mother of four that even remotely sound persecutory--by the press or by any bloggers. Ronalee Vanasdlen has not said who, when, or specifically how she has been persecuted vis-à-vis her son's arrest (she also said the arrest of her son has been an ordeal for her and her family, and I don't doubt it, as I'm sure the incident has been for Steven Velasquez, the man who was rendered unconscious and taken to the hospital on the night Brett Vanasdlen was arrested). Ronalee Vanasdlen's "we're being persecuted" line just sounds tabloidish, narcissistically sad in a lime-light-grabbing kind of way, not to mention desperate, and it clouds the fact that her son is innocent of a crime until proven guilty in court. Yes, her false claims of persecution, and her false claims that the Champaign, Illinois police department has a hate crime quota policy erases whatever credibility one might afford Brett in his latest (post-defense-attorney-hiring) remarks about the case (remarks that, according to even his supporters, are markedly different from what he told the police at the time he was busted in early April). I, for one, grow highly suspicious when a criminal defendant starts changing his story, and that suspicion turns to a loud peal of laughter when arrest-quota conspiracy theories get introduced.

Ronalee Vanasdlen has further claimed her son was so blithely unconcerned about his arrest that, she claims, he failed to make supposedly important statements to the police. Oops. She also said Brett "never dreamed that something like this could happen to him." Well, really, how could he: he was raised to believe that he is "holy" and a "saint". Brett Vanasdlen's mother also asserts that her son is "so naïve it’s scary" and thus he could not grasp the gravity of his being arrested. Really? What's not to get about a set of handcuffs being placed on you, taking a ride to the police station in the backseat of a patrol car by men in blue uniforms, and the Miranda Warning being given to you prior to the mug-shot and the fingerprinting? That level of cluelessness--if the statement by his mother about his naivety is true--makes one wonder whether Brett Vanasdlen didn't leave Purdue University after just one semester because he couldn't conquer the strenuous academic load required there (his advocates say he scaled down to an in-state, lesser school--one that requires not even a GED for admission--to have more "playing time" on the baseball team). Regardless of the reason for his transfer to Parkland College this past semester, here's the thing about Brett Vanasdlen and naivety: Brett Vanasdlen is not so naïve as to have failed to learn anti-gay slurs (learned where mom?) and he is not so naïve as to have failed to direct said homophobic slurs at a gay man walking down the street (that part of the hate crime allegation is not in dispute by either side in the Vanasdlen-Velasquez case). If you're trying to find Jesus' do-unto-others teaching in those acts, forget it, they aren't there.

Additionally, Ronalee Vanasdlen also has complained how much money her son's privately retained attorney will likely cost. She fails to grasp that moaning about attorney's fees sounds like an upper-middle-class person bitching about their upper-middle-class privilege (how many Americans have the luxury of being able to actually afford to retain a criminal defense attorney?); it falls on deaf ears the way complaints about the high cost of a vintage bottle of Cabernet Sauvignon hits the ears of working-class Joes when made by rich, long-time diners at Spago's or the French Laundry. If worse comes to worse, Ronalee Vanasdlen--who lives on her enormous Vanasdlen family compound--could use some of her rental income from one of her two resort condominiums to help her son foot his legal bills. From her Naples Bay Resort condominium alone, she rakes in between $3,800 and $6,500 per month. In addition, Ronalee Vanasdlen's Dominican Republic property nets her between $2,800 to $4,200 a month, so even if her son's legal bills go as high as she says ($20-$30K), that only totals a few months of her rental income. Also, boo-hooing about attorney's fees posted at hate-fomenting websites that ask for donations comes close to cyber-begging for your hateful sociopolitical cause. Any thinking member of her evangelical church must be worried that Ronalee Vanasdlen's obsession with hanging onto every possible almighty dollar has got to be lessening her chances of her resurrection when the Rapture happens.

If Ronalee Vanasdlen's views about hate crime laws weren't so similar to those shared by a still-bigoted ex-Klansman (David Duke), and the likes of someone discredited by a large body of psychologists for his homophobic propaganda peddled as respectable social science (Peter LaBarbera), and if she weren't using anti-gay/anti-hate crime hate mongers (like Ted Pike and the far right news agency World Daily Net) to blame a host of people, institutions and laws for her son's legal situation, one might feel some pity for the woman whose eldest son is possibly facing jail time next year instead of his sophomore year in college. Instead, Ronalee Vanasdlen comes off as sympathetic as the character of Hillary Swank's mother in Clint Eastwood's film Million Dollar Baby and as classy as Brandine Spuckler.

The reality is that Brett Vanasdlen is a grown man expected to be responsible for his own actions including decisions about his finances (he supports his education at Parkland College via an athletic scholarship after all). If he had chosen, he could have a public defender represent him instead of a pricey private attorney (of course, he also might have chosen to not hurl an anti-gay slur at Steven Velasquez). It's hard not to conclude Brett's mother should have taken the advice of her son's attorney and kept mum on the whole incident. The sum total of Ronalee Vanasdlen's politically- and personally-motivated baseless complaints and her alignment with homophobic, racist, and anti-Semitic hate-mongers, coupled with her assertion that her son, Brett Vanasdlen, is "so naïve it's scary", now makes one wonder how far away the apple and the tree are here.

Sunday, May 4, 2008

Anatomy of a Hate Crime (Part Two)

We know from examining the FBI's hate crime statistics from 2006 that hate crimes based on hatred toward non-heterosexuals accounted for 1,387 of all 9,080 hate crimes reported to the FBI in 2006. Over nine hundred gay men were the victims of reported hate crimes that year; they constituted 9.46% of all reported hate crime victims. That percentage is totally out of proportion to the estimated percent of gay men that make up the population of the United States which is about 2.8%, according to a reputable study from the National Health and Social Life Survey by Edward O. Laumann, John H. Gagnon, Robert T. Michael, and Stuart Michaels titled "The Social organization of sexuality in the United States". In other words in 2006 gay men were 3.38 times more likely to be the victim of a reported hate crime (often genteelly called a bias-motivated crime) than would be expected. Reported is an operative word here because there is some federal data that for every hate crime reported, there are about 20 that go unreported. Logic thus dictates that the relative risk for gay men is much higher than 3.38. We also know from examining the FBI's hate crime data that most hate crimes involving violence directed at a person (such as murder, rape, etc.) are of the assault variety (aggravated and simple assault). Again looking at the FBI's most recent dataset, we learn that of the 5,449 reported hate crimes directed against persons (not property) in 2006 most (53.5%) were assaults.

Most hate crimes are barely covered by the media--unless they end in murder as in the case of Larry King, end in permanent disfigurement or damage as in last year's David Richeson case or involve torture as in the Megan Williams case last year. If a non-lethal hate crime is covered by the press at all it typically involves only reporting that a suspected hate crime occurred; if an alleged perpetrator happens to be apprehended immediately following the hate crime incident, that too will be reported. Rarely, however, do journalists follow-up on a case, following it through to the end of its life: to conviction or acquittal. It's ironic that assault crimes targeting gay men are so common that we've coined a term for them, but yet they scarcely go noticed by us, in large part because they go unreported by the press. Few, it seems, care about gay bashings except the bashers themselves. Or, perhaps, such assaults are as common as summer baseball games, and so, from the perspective of a media editor, unless there is something unique about a particular hate crime assault, it's not considered worthy to report.

In my previous blog (Anatomy of a Hate Crime, Part One), I began my attempt (as a non-journalist) to report as much as I could about one hate crime assault allegation (on a college student named Steven Velasquez) and the alleged perpetrator of that crime for reasons detailed in that diary. Let me repeat a point from that blog, a point not to be lost when reading this one. But for the angle or force of any particular punch or shove any hate crime assault could have been a hate crime murder. Last year alone two young gay men, targeted precisely because they were gay, were each punched only once; both died. Trying to obtain some basic factual information about the case I am following and reporting has proved difficult as I said in my previous diary. It's interesting who's communicated with me, who hasn't, and perhaps most interesting of all, who's discussing the case (beside me) online and what's being said.

Brett Vanasdlen, an 18-year-old freshman at Parkland College in Champaign, Illinois, was arrested on April 12, 2008, in Champaign, after he allegedly yelled anti-gay slurs at Steven Velasquez, 20, who was walking near his college campus with three friends, and then allegedly pushed Velasquez so forcefully that when he hit the ground he was knocked unconscious and suffered from a head injury. Born in podunk Minooka, Illinois, Vanasdlen, a talented baseball player, had played baseball at Purdue University very briefly in his first and only semester at the West Lafayette, Indiana university, before transferring (for reasons unknown to me) to Parkland College. His choosing to attend Parkland was very likely based on the successful baseball program the Division II school has: the Parkland Cobras won the National Junior College Athletic Association's World Series in 2002, finished fourth in 2003, and finished second in 2005, according to the school's baseball webpage. By my calculations, during the five weeks and 27 games he played for the Cobras (from February 29, 2008 until on or around April 8, 2008) Vanasdlen had the fifth best batting average (.342) of the 13 Parkland players who batted in at least ten games (the team had an average of hitting .334). He was the second leading player on his team in terms of RBIs and he was tied for 19th in all of Division II college baseball by April 12th.

Jodi Littleton, the Executive Director of Community Relations at Parkland College, and the only school administrator who would talk to me, told me on April 21st that she did not know whether Parkland has, as some schools do, a policy or procedure for possibly expelling students accused of a violent crime. Ms. Littleton told me that Vanasdlen was kicked off the baseball team, but her words suggested he was still enrolled in school. I realize that for student privacy reasons college administrators cannot talk about a particular student to the press or even to a blogger like myself. What's astonishing about the school's response to my question about its policies are these facts.

Ms. Littleton told me on April 21st that Linda Moore, Parkland's Vice President of Student Services, and/or Damien McDonald, Executive Director of Community Relations, would know if Parkland College has a policy or procedure for possibly expelling students accused of a violent offense. Ms. Littleton said she would email Moore and McDonald about my question; she took my telephone number so that either administrator could speak with me. Marsha Kaster, Moore's administrative assistant, confirmed to me later in the afternoon on April 21st that Ms. Littleton had emailed both Moore and McDonald of my request to speak with them. After placing me on hold briefly--to see if Damien McDonald was available to speak with me--Kaster returned to state somewhat tersely that he was not available and that, "They'll contact you at their earliest convenience." I had the distinct impression from the new tone in her voice that I would not hear from either Moore or McDonald. I haven't. Now I'm left to speculate whether or not Parkland College has bothered to follow its own student safety policy:
"It is the policy of Parkland College to keep its faculty, staff and students informed of all matters concerning safety and security. The Department of Public Safety has developed a plan to notify the campus population...The level of notification depends upon the type and severity of the incident."
I could find no evidence that Parkland notified its student body that one of its freshman was arrested for allegedly causing head trauma to a gay college student at a neighboring university in an alleged hate crime gay bashing, and that the freshman has not been administratively expelled from school, even temporarily, pending some type of school investigation. A gay student at Parkland might want that information, even if they aren't told the assailant's identity. Perhaps the administrators at Parkland College could care less about the safety of its gay students. Perhaps they care more about the reputation of its successful baseball team. (If it's any consolation to the student body at Parkland College, the school has a policy regarding sexual assault that can include a disciplinary hearing.)

I also made attempts to speak with the Champaign County State's Attorney's Office about the allegation against Brett Vanasdlen, because the one and only television news account of the incident offered no details about whether or not Vanasdlen was with anyone (as Steven Velasquez was) at the time of the incident, whether he was arrested immediately following the incident, and where exactly he was arrested. What I learned when I spoke to the woman who answered the telephone at the State's Attorney's Office on April 21st is that the case had not been assigned a prosecutor. The woman stated, "It’s being looked at but it has not been assigned." She said that it was being examined by two attorneys (presumably those responsible for assigning cases to D.A.s), but the unidentified woman I spoke with at the State’s Attorney’s Office would not give me either of their names when I asked. She did state, however, that May 6, 2008 in Courtroom S (#315) would be the date and location of the next hearing on the matter. So, more than a week following the alleged hate crime assault the state has not bothered to assign the case. One is left to wonder how much the deck might be stacked against the victim seeking justice in this case. After all, Brett Vanasdlen, the State's Attorney's Office had told me, had already done what any savvy person in his shoes would do. He retained an attorney. Specifically, attorney Carol A. Dison at Becket & Webber out of Tuscola, Illinois was retained as defense counsel. With a little digging, I learned that that law firm has a partner with the same last name as Parkland College's Vice President of Student Services, so I also intended to ask Linda Moore if Parkland College had retained Ms. Dison for their baseball star or directed him to Becket & Webber, but as I've said, no one at Parkland has returned my calls.

Little has been reported by the media about the alleged attack on Steven Velasquez, but that has not stopped people from commenting online about the incident. What's surprising to me is not only the content of the comments, but also where some of them have been posted. Other than my own blogging on the subject, two other websites that reported the initial media report of the alleged hate crime against Steven Velasquez allowed readers to comment on the incident and how it was covered. One is a Seattle-based gay-oriented blogsite run by a guy named Tom. The other was the CBS affiliate in Champaign, Illinois that initially broke the story. This is where, I think, things get interesting; it's where the sociopolitical climate of our country gets illuminated. The Seattle blogsite had a whopping ten postings to the Champaign, Illinois incident, as of May 2, 2008, which is unusual because of the location of the blogsite relative to where the incident is said to have occurred and because the alleged attack was not a fatal one or one widely publicized. (As I said in my previous diary I was the author of one of those postings). Yet the Champaign, Illinois website had just three postings, and this too is surprising because, as mentioned, the attack took place right there in Champaign.

OK, let's have a look at what people have said about the alleged hate crime and where they said it. At the Seattle-based gay blogsite, excluding my posting and the two postings by Tom the blogsite owner, four of the seven postings were in support of the alleged assailant! One person claimed to know the assailant and to know he is not guilty, another claimed to know the victim and to know he lied about the incident, and a third claimed to know that one of the three Champaign, Illinois police officers involved in the incident just wants to make life miserable for the accused, Brett Vanasdlen. In my first blog, I wondered whether Brett Vanasdlen himself wasn’t the author of one of the first postings at Tom’s blogsite—that drunken-sounding posting on Friday April 18th just six days after his arrest declares Vanasdlen’s innocence:
"all this is bullshit brett didnt do shit its jsut some pussy looking for a way out"
I specifically wondered how, if he was the posting's author, Brett Vanasdlen could be so careless as to not even bother to at least pose as a gay man when attempting to deny the accusations against him at a gay-themed blogsite. Then, as if magic, a second posting at Tom’s blogsite in support of Brett Vanasdlen sprang up on April 20th, and this person wanted it known—as if to add credibility to his claim—that he was (you guessed it) gay. What next, a posting from someone who could provide damning information about the Champaign, Illinois police officers responsible for Vanasdlen’s arrest? Yep. This April 23rd posting on Tom’s blogsite reads in part:

"From my understanding, there were 3 cops on the scene, and 2 did not want to even write the incident up, while the third was very intent on making life miserable for Van Asdlen, and won out."
These are pretty amazing postings at a gay blogsite. Whether or not someone was trying to do damage control for the accused at the blogsite, Tom, the blogsite's owner who moderates all submitted posts, certainly can't be accused of censorship. What is also clear is the poor-him-sounding theme of these postings: Brett Vanasdlen, although charged with a fourth-degree felony crime, we’re supposed to believe, is really the victim in the assault on Steven Velasquez, not Mr. Velasquez. We’re told to believe that the victim had it out for Vanasdlen (why we don’t know) and that a police officer had it out for Vanasdlen (why we don’t know). What the person or people who posted at Tom's blogsite fail to see is that complaining about the calls that umpires make in the game of life does not change those calls.


Similar to the postings at Tom's gay-themed blogsite, the comments left at the CBS affiliate that broke the story didn't seem to show much support for the man who suffered a concussion in the attack. One commenter sang praises for the assailant stating:
"I would like to stick up for Brett VanAsdlen. I know him. He's a very nice young man."
That commenter went on to say that the CBS news story that included a brief comment by the victim and one of the eyewitnesses shouldn't have been aired. A second commenter basically agreed, adding that he is not "a fan" of hate crime laws, and suggesting the news station had some sort of bias in reporting this particular crime allegation. Then there was the third and final commenter from yet another Brett Vanasdlen fan. This commenter said:


"I would also like to stand up for Brett V. I too know him. He has been like an older brother to me sinse i was little...Brett is a good guy. I do not believe this was a hate crime at all. I believe that the fact that the victim was gay should have nothing to do with it. Maybe the media should have heard what happened from Brett VanAsdlen first before they put that clip on t.v. Now I'm not saying that Brett didn't do anything because I wasn't there and i don't know what happened but i do believe that he should be given a chance."
To be clear the Champaign, Illinois CBS affiliate did not state or imply that Vanasdlen was guilty in their report of the incident; they merely said he was accused of attacking a gay University of Illinois student that allegedly included anti-gay slurs and that resulted in the victim needing to be hospitalized for head trauma. Apparently seeing the victim describe his version of what happened to him--seeing a gay man stand up for himself, seeing a gay man give voice to his ordeal and listening to a story of a gay man who vowed to seek justice following an alleged unprovoked assault on him--hit a raw nerve with middle America.

Judging from the comments from the locals, Brett Vanasdlen ought to plead not guilty and demand a jury trial. He's certain to get an acquittal. Some people just refuse to believe that some crimes could be based on the assailant's prejudice and hatred of persons from a specific group. To think that this could be a possibility a case involving a male, presumably heterosexual college athlete is apparently an affront to many. Like baseball, gay bashing seems an all-American sport never to be sullied. To dare to report just an allegation of a gay bashing hate crime, especially one that involves the arrest of a college baseball player, as two news sources did in the Brett Vanasdlen case, has brought much ire. It's as if the press attacked mom on the Fourth of July with an apple pie and then burned Old Glory.

Brett Vanasdlen, the alleged hate crime perpetrator in the Champaign, Illinois case, has received some supportive words from rightwing hate-mongers. Typical of one of his histrionic rants, anti-gay, anti-Semitic, über-Christian, and anti-hate crime activist, Reverend Ted Pike, published a blog in support of Brett Vanasdlen whereby he claims to know that the victim was the one who actually put his hands on Brett Vanasdlen, and not the other way around as the police allege (the good man of the cloth comes to this conclusion not by speaking to one of the eyewitnesses at the scene of the alleged gay bashing, but by speaking with someone not present when the incident occurred...Brett Vanasdlen's mother!). Reverend Ted Pike broke one of God's commandments and lied when he wrote:


"The homosexual and public media in the Champaign area are now in hue and cry to convict Brett. Homosexual groups are publishing articles against him in their media and on the internet. (See, http://illinoishomepage.net/content/fulltext/?cid=12590) They have posted his address on the internet. Homosexuals are now picketing on the street where this alleged hate crime occurred."
As I've shown, quite the opposite has occurred. The media barely touched the story, only one gay blogsite mentioned the story, and the support for the alleged perpetrator has been shockingly loud (I say shockingly because not one eyewitness has reported something contrary to what the police have alleged). Incidentally, I could find no published address of Vanasdlen, and I could find nothing about a single person picketing, as Rev. Pike claimed (although the University of Illinois' GLBT student group held a rally opposing hate crimes and supporting tolerance in response to their fellow student, Steven Velasquez, being assaulted). But this is what we can expect from someone who is adored by none other than ex-Klansman, David Duke, who, unsurprisingly is as vehemently opposed to hate crime legislation as Rev. Ted Pike. (For anyone reading this who is opposed to hate crime laws, just so you know, these are the dogs you are laying with: dyed-in-the-wool bigots, neo-fascists, and members of known hate groups).


Speaking of those with résumés that include membership in known hate groups, I found another posting about baseball slugger and accused gay-man-slugging Brett Vanasdlen. This one came from the Vanguard Network News forum, which is a virulently anti-Semitic, white supremacist hate site. As of May 3, 2008, twelve white supremacists commented on Rev. Ted Pike's call-to-arms in support of "Christian" Brett Vanasdlen. The responses from the white supremacists were less homophobic (and more anti-Christian) than I would have guessed, but unsurprisingly none of the white supremacists came out in favor of hate crime laws or supporting the gay victim in the case (and, yeah, some were sickeningly homophobic, but mostly the comments were a slurry of anti-Jewish invective).

From my examination of hundreds of reported hate crimes in the United States, more often than not the alleged assailant avoids trial and pleads guilty to a lesser (non-hate crime) charge; or, the hate crime charges are dropped prior to trial. Also, from my examination of recent cases of college students arrested for allegedly committing a hate crime rarely does the District Attorney vigorously prosecute the case, and never do such students receive any time in jail. Judges just won't have that (call it college student privilege or call it preserving the status quo).

Vanasdlen is not the first college jock to be charged with a hate crime, and he'll probably have the same fate as those before him. It is my prediction in the case of Brett Vanasdlen that at most he will receive probation for a charge other than a hate crime (I'll guess something equivalent to disorderly conduct or simple assault). Unless the victim in the case, Steven Velasquez, is tenacious (and he may very well be, he has eyewitnesses and it sounds like he has some really supportive friends and a supportive college community), Vanasdlen has a 50-50 chance of having the charge against him dropped. Regardless, I predict he'll be back on the Parkland College baseball team next year.