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. Indianapolis employers harassment among minorities AFRICAN Americans needs to be discussed the metro Indianapolis area is horrible when it comes to harassing African American employees especially in the local healthcare facilities. Racially profiling in the workplace is an major issue. Please make it better because I'm many civil rights leaders would come here and justify that Indiana is a state the WORKS only applies to Caucasian Americans especially in Hamilton county. Indiana targets African Americans in the workplace so when governor pence is trying to convince people to vote for him this would be awesome publicity for the Presidency Elections.

  2. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  3. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  4. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  5. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

ADVERTISEMENT