ILNews

FBI shares hate crime statistics

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

In late September 2010, as part of the FBI Citizen’s Academy in Indianapolis, agents passed around photos from a cross burning that took place four years earlier in Muncie.

Members of the class were appalled when they learned that not only did someone burn a cross as a way to intimidate a family – biracial children lived in the home – but they were also surprised that the offenders had taken photos of the cross burning and had shared those photos with family and friends.

It wasn’t until 2007 that someone who knew both the offenders and the victims gave those photos to law enforcement.

These and other types of hate crimes are regularly reported to the FBI, which annually compiles statistics. Statistics for 2009 were released in late 2010. Indiana ranked 27th, between Oklahoma at 26th and Wisconsin at 28th, in the number of hate crimes reported.

Kyle Shroyer ultimately pled guilty in November 2007 to the March 2006 cross burning, and in January 2008 he received a 15-month sentence, according to FBI reports. Kyle Milbourn was found guilty by a jury in May 2008, and was sentenced to 121 months.

In July 2008, another unrelated cross burning took place in Muncie, according to FBI reports. Three men involved with that incident pled guilty in September 2009, and each was sentenced to about a year in federal prison followed by two to three years of probation.

A number of other cross burnings have taken place around Indiana in the last few years, according to FBI reports. Other incidents include one in Mishawaka in September 2007, and another in Elkhart in May 2008.

Milbourn has since appealed, and the 7th Circuit affirmed his sentence in April 2010. In that decision, USA v. Kyle Milbourn, No. 08-2525, Judge Terence T. Evans gave a brief history of how cross burnings have symbolized racial hatred, and said that these kinds of acts will not be tolerated.

As hate crimes like these continue to make news, including a case in Bloomington in November where rocks were thrown at Chabad Jewish Student Center at Indiana University and other anti-Semitic acts took place near the student center in the course of a month, the FBI continues to collect this information and help local law enforcement when necessary.

While the FBI has released hate crime statistics since 1995, the bureau also cautions against using these numbers for statistical analysis.

The statistics likely don’t include every crime that could be considered motivated by discrimination, but it is the most comprehensive listing of its kind. It also serves as a reminder that crimes motivated by bias of a victim’s race, religion, sexual-orientation, ethnicity/national origin, or disability continue to occur.

In 2009, 2,034 law enforcement agencies reported 6,604 hate crime incidents involving 7,789 offenses, according to the FBI’s report. There were 6,598 single-bias incidents that involved 7,775 offenses, 8,322 victims, and 6,219 offenders.

The six multiple-bias incidents reported in 2009, what the FBI defines as “an incident in which more than one offense type occurs and at least two offense types are motivated by different biases,” involved 14 offenses, 14 victims, and six offenders.

California topped the list for number of hate crimes reported in 2009, with 1,015 incidents reported. It was followed by New York with 626 reported incidents, New Jersey with 549 reported incidents, Massachusetts with 322 reported incidents, and Michigan with 314 reported incidents. Ohio ranked sixth with 297 reported incidents, Kentucky ranked 14th with 150 reported incidents, and Illinois ranked 18th with 129 reported incidents.

hate crimeIn 2008, Indiana ranked 30th. The top five states were California with 1,381 reported incidents, followed by New Jersey with 744, New York with 570, Michigan with 560, and Ohio with 345. Illinois ranked 19th with 120 reported incidents, and Kentucky ranked 28th with 64 reported incidents.

In Indiana in 2009, 139 agencies participated in reporting. Of those, 17 reported a total of 55 hate crimes. The number of participating agencies has steadily increased in the last few years. In 2006, 124 agencies participated; in 2007, 127 agencies participated; and in 2008, 131 agencies participated.

The number of reported hate crimes in Indiana has also fluctuated. In 2006, 39 incidents involving bias were reported; in 2007, 40 incidents were reported; in 2008, 61 incidents were reported; and in 2009, 55 incidents were reported.

But it’s the number of agencies participating that really matters, said Andrew Northern, supervisory special agent for the Southern District of Indiana, based in Indianapolis.

“We caution people to take into account the fact that there’s different numbers of participating agencies from year to year,” which can also lead to varying interpretations of what fits the category, he said.

However, he added, “a larger number of agencies participated in 2009 – that number is growing. Those agencies provide the information voluntarily after it is brought to their attention. The primary objective is to generate reliable information.”

The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act was signed into law Oct. 28, 2009, and Northern said this act could affect the numbers reported in 2010 and future years.

The measure expands the 1969 United States federal hate-crime law to include crimes motivated by a victim’s actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. The bill also gives federal authorities greater ability to engage in hate crimes investigations that local authorities choose not to pursue.

“It would provide more opportunities for prosecutions than in the past,” Northern said. “The Department of Justice, the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the FBI work hard to make sure those who commit hate crimes are brought to justice.”

Indiana remains one of five states without its own hate crimes statute to protect victims. While Indiana law requires hate crimes to be reported, there is no law to affect sentencing in these cases. Hate crimes legislation has been introduced in recent sessions, but it has not ultimately passed.

It is unclear whether hate crimes legislation will be introduced in the 2011 session; no bill on this topic has been introduced as of Dec. 30. The latest bias crimes bill to be introduced in Indiana was in 2009.•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • other crimes not hateful enough?
    Are regular crimes not hateful? Hate crime counting and enhancement awards "privileged victim" status to some and not others. Moreover, it is the state punishing speech and though rather than conduct. From both perspectives, hate crimes smack of Orwellian Thought Crime. They are a tool of antagonistic characterization that is aimed not even at the perp but at whatever majority population the perp may come from and how that population may be in social conflict with another. Pure politics in other words and little to do with a just and ordered society.

    A study of differential racial statistics will also show that a disproportionate amount of crime happens cross-racially and that in itself is not "hate?" Look at the facts and tell me this is not something being used as propaganda.

    Finally about religious hate. There is so much religious discrimination and hate and war to go around in the middle east-- and not all of the aggression coming from Muslims, either, sorry folks; but there is so much to go around does the US really need to be in that business too?
  • Hate Crimes
    I must agree that we need better laws on hate crimes. So many things go unattended to, it is just sad.
  • hate crimes
    these article is so true we need better laws to help the people

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT