It’s not a description, it’s a legal term. If they claim it is a hate-crime they have to be able to prove they had a specific motivation which can be difficult.
They beat a person near to death for looking too man-ish and being in the women’s bathroom. I don’t think hate crime will be a hard thing to prove here.
Remember, some of the jury will probably be at least loosely against lesbians or trans people. If all you have is she said, he said, those people won’t convict for a hate crime. But if you stick to just the beating, which doesn’t need to prive a motive, they would vote to convict. It sucks, but that is what a jury of your peers means.
Not sure what youre being so defensive about. You made a wrong assumption which in no way would hold up in court, thats what they pointed out. Youre making it sound like winning a case is the same as solving a math equation, but its not. In many cases it is very complicated and legal moves need to have a solid basis.
Your reaction is very childish and its only purpose was to mask your unknowingness.
Im not even sure you understood the point they were trying to make. Guys beating up women happens a lot (at least a lot more often than it should) and most of the time for reasons other than homophobia.
It’s not a description, it’s a legal term. If they claim it is a hate-crime they have to be able to prove they had a specific motivation which can be difficult.
They beat a person near to death for looking too man-ish and being in the women’s bathroom. I don’t think hate crime will be a hard thing to prove here.
Yeah just like it wouldnt be hard to prove cops killing innocents when there is literal video evidence, yet we know how thats working out.
ThEy wErE cOmInG rIgHt 4 us!!
Remember, some of the jury will probably be at least loosely against lesbians or trans people. If all you have is she said, he said, those people won’t convict for a hate crime. But if you stick to just the beating, which doesn’t need to prive a motive, they would vote to convict. It sucks, but that is what a jury of your peers means.
Oh, I know
I said as much further down
The legal burden of proof is fraught
My initial reaction was born of frustration and disgust at what had happened
deleted by creator
You make an excellent point - it’s never happened before for any other reason.
deleted by creator
Not sure what youre being so defensive about. You made a wrong assumption which in no way would hold up in court, thats what they pointed out. Youre making it sound like winning a case is the same as solving a math equation, but its not. In many cases it is very complicated and legal moves need to have a solid basis.
Your reaction is very childish and its only purpose was to mask your unknowingness.
Im not even sure you understood the point they were trying to make. Guys beating up women happens a lot (at least a lot more often than it should) and most of the time for reasons other than homophobia.
deleted by creator