Hate crimes do happen in Indiana

June 10, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
A Muncie man was sentenced June 6 by a federal judge to 121 months in prison for a hate crime. The man burned a cross last year in the lawn of a woman and her three biracial children back in 2006. The man also tried to prevent a witness from speaking to FBI agents about the cross burning. Just last month in Muncie, a Ball State student claimed he and his friends were victims of a hate crime when they were attacked by two people shouting homosexual slurs.

In case you didn’t know, Indiana is one of just five states without sentence enhancements for hate crimes. If local officials want to prosecute someone for a racially motivated attack or destruction of property because of one’s religion, gender, or sexual orientation, sentences can’t be lengthened because of the motive for the attack.

The debate is whether Indiana really needs to have hate-crime legislation on the books – a crime is a crime, right? But when people are targeted because of the color of their skin or their sexuality, it affects the greater community in ways that random incidents of crime may not. You can bet that other minorities who lived near the woman who had the cross burning in her yard were more fearful of it happening to them than non-minorities in the area.

Even though these may be isolated incidents, they still affect the psyche of those around them who may not look at the crime as a random incident, but as an area of town or an establishment where a particular minority isn’t welcome. These crimes show that the Indiana General Assembly needs to pass legislation to allow Indiana to join the other 45 states who have decided crimes motivated by hate deserve tougher penalties.
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Do you really think there are crimes that do NOT have an impact on people other than the victim? They all do. If you work in a convenience store and one gets tuck up in the next town and maybe the woman working there is killed, you\'re going to be scared. If cross-burning is worse, make it a Class A felony. Penalties depending on psychoanalysis of the criminal bring back echoes of 1984.
  • You can bet that most individuals doing these crimes are not considering if they live in a state where hate crimes add an additional 5 or tens years to the sentence. Sure, I think it sounds good to know you live in a state where hate crimes are double-time, but is this really going to prevent? This guy got 10 years. Odds are, after 2 months in the joint, this guy would wish he\'d never done the crime. And, I\'m sure he\'d never commit the same crime again after he\'s released. But, in the interest of promoting a state where the perception is everyone is racially playing equal, then by all means pass the legislation. But, the fundamental root cause of these crimes still goes unanswered.
  • The most amazing part of this subject is that 45 states or 90% of our states think that policing the subliminal thoughts of criminals is as important to our criminal justice system as policing actions and intent of criminals. How ridiculous. As pointed out by previous commentators there is no practical additional deterrence, nor is there any victim benefit. So what is the motivation to even have a sentence enhancement? The answer seems quite obvious to me-simply put: vengeance. So we wish to utilize the powerful hand of government to satisfy the emotional reflexes of disgruntled persons or groups with a political ax to grind? Is that the role that we really want adopt? Come on, people. Let\'s get to back to basics. We can\'t even rehabilitate the criminals that we already have behind bars. All we are accomplishing currently is higher criminal education while incarcerated. That is a major problem for our entire society. Wouldn\'t that be a much more worthy aim of added efforts in our criminal justice system?
  • In practice, hate crime enhancements operate to impose greater sentences on white males as a group for the same crimes committed by perpetrators of other groups.

    Is this a denial of equal protection of law-- equal protection for white males?

    Are we trying for a color blind society or one in which white males are punished for the sins of earlier generations?

    If such a law is passed here, will it engender the very bad thoughts that the enhancements are designed to encouraged? In a word, is it counterproductive to its explicit goal?

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
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. All the lawyers involved in this don't add up to a hill of beans; mostly yes-men punching their tickets for future advancement. REMF types. Window dressing. Who in this mess was a real hero? the whistleblower that let the public know about the torture, whom the US sent to Jail. John Kyriakou. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/26/us/ex-officer-for-cia-is-sentenced-in-leak-case.html?_r=0 Now, considering that Torture is Illegal, considering that during Vietnam a soldier was court-martialed and imprisoned for waterboarding, why has the whistleblower gone to jail but none of the torturers have been held to account? It's amazing that Uncle Sam's sunk lower than Vietnam. But that's where we're at. An even more unjust and pointless war conducted in an even more bogus manner. this from npr: "On Jan. 21, 1968, The Washington Post ran a front-page photo of a U.S. soldier supervising the waterboarding of a captured North Vietnamese soldier. The caption said the technique induced "a flooding sense of suffocation and drowning, meant to make him talk." The picture led to an Army investigation and, two months later, the court martial of the soldier." Today, the US itself has become lawless.

  2. "Brain Damage" alright.... The lunatic is on the grass/ The lunatic is on the grass/ Remembering games and daisy chains and laughs/ Got to keep the loonies on the path.... The lunatic is in the hall/ The lunatics are in my hall/ The paper holds their folded faces to the floor/ And every day the paper boy brings more/ And if the dam breaks open many years too soon/ And if there is no room upon the hill/ And if your head explodes with dark forbodings too/ I'll see you on the dark side of the moon!!!

  3. It is amazing how selectively courts can read cases and how two very similar factpatterns can result in quite different renderings. I cited this very same argument in Brown v. Bowman, lost. I guess it is panel, panel, panel when one is on appeal. Sad thing is, I had Sykes. Same argument, she went the opposite. Her Rooker-Feldman jurisprudence is now decidedly unintelligible.

  4. November, 2014, I was charged with OWI/Endangering a person. I was not given a Breathalyzer test and the arresting officer did not believe that alcohol was in any way involved. I was self-overmedicated with prescription medications. I was taken to local hospital for blood draw to be sent to State Tox Lab. My attorney gave me a cookie-cutter plea which amounts to an ALCOHOL-related charge. Totally unacceptable!! HOW can I get my TOX report from the state lab???

  5. My mother got temporary guardianship of my children in 2012. my husband and I got divorced 2015 the judge ordered me to have full custody of all my children. Does this mean the temporary guardianship is over? I'm confused because my divorce papers say I have custody and he gets visits and i get to claim the kids every year on my taxes. So just wondered since I have in black and white that I have custody if I can go get my kids from my moms and not go to jail?

ADVERTISEMENT