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.
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:
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:
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.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment