It often takes public outcry to prompt prosecution of assaults or harassment that are motivated by bias. So what explains the frequent failure of police in Seattle and elsewhere to identify and investigate hate crimes? Lack of training and misconceptions about the law, for starters.
Login / Register
go to mobile version »

Our Sponsors:

READ MORE »

Our Members

Many thanks to

Bob Anderson

and

Helen Welborn

some of our many supporters.

ALL MEMBERS »

Crime »

 

Crimes of hate: Sometimes justice is blind to the obvious

 

It often takes public outcry to prompt prosecution of assaults or harassment that are motivated by bias. So what explains the frequent failure of police in Seattle and elsewhere to identify and investigate hate crimes? Lack of training and misconceptions about the law, for starters.

U.S. hate-crime victims.

The story after a while becomes awfully familiar: Someone in Seattle is assaulted because of who they are – gay, black, Jewish. It bears all the classic signs of a hate crime. Police show up but act as though it's an ordinary crime. When they file a report, it's not designated a hate crime and is neither investigated nor prosecuted as one.

Robert Jamieson, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer columnist, reported last month on just such a case: The incident occurred Aug. 4 in Seattle's Belltown neighborhood, when 47-year-old Michael Wrenn of Seattle, along with his friend, Aaron Hudy, were assaulted by a drunken man who asked them if they were gay before punching and kicking them. Moreover, said Wrenn and Hudy, Seattle police treated their concerns dismissively and then failed to designate the assault as a bias crime in their report. Wrote Jamieson:

[G]iven the strong words allegedly used before the attack – "What are you guys, fags?" – the beating looks even worse. Yet on the police report, the box that says "bias crime" was left blank for reasons that are a mystery. Sounds like a bias crime to me.

The incident inspired an Aug. 17 meeting between Seattle police and a trio of City Council members, Tom Rasmussen, Nick Licata, and Sally Clark. Assistant Chief Nick Metz, who oversees the city's bias-crimes unit, reassured the council members that hate crimes were a police priority, promising that officers would be reminded about the need to identify potential bias crimes as such, even when in doubt, so they can be further assessed.

In recent years, there have been a series of incidents similar to that in Belltown in which police handled fairly obvious hate crimes as run-of-the-mill incidents – though police revisited some of these cases after a public outcry, and the outcome was a bias-crime prosecution.

  • In April 2006, a black Whitman middle-schooler walking home near a McDonald's in north Ballard was assaulted by three white men who seemingly were provoked only by the victim's race; the men used racial slurs both before in a verbal assault on the youngster and as they beat him. When police arrived on the scene, they first handcuffed the victim. Eventually, two 19-year-old men, Cory Stewart and Colin Kelly, were charged and eventually convicted under the state's malicious-harassment law.
  • In October 2004, a gay Seattle businessman named Kevin Shaw was found beaten to death in his Porsche. Like many gay-bashing hate crimes, this one was notable for the extraordinary violence the perpetrator visited on his victim and the apparent lack of a motive. When a man named Michael Saga Maiava, who had met Shaw on a chat line, was arrested and charged with the killing, a bias-crime charge was never considered – even though Maiava invoked a "gay panic" defense. The perpetrator's explanation when caught clearly indicated a bias crime. This outraged many in the gay community. As Mario Paduano at Seattlest put it:
  • Simply put, everything about this case screams gay. Yet you wouldn't know it from the tepid local news coverage. Instead, perhaps out of respect for the dead, perhaps out of respect for the family, perhaps due to cold feet, perhaps out of mere spinelessness, the Seattle media is presenting this as any other murder and Shaw as any other guy. The result: a hate crime may go uninvestigated.
  • In November 2004, a trio of white males began hassling a patron of a Ballard restaurant, asking him if he were gay; the man politely assured them he wasn't. When the man left, one of the three walked up and decked him with a blow to the head, making him fall to the pavement, where he hit his head again, knocking him unconscious. The brave trio then took turns kicking their prey as he lay on the sidewalk, witnesses said. One of them kept shouting, "This is still Ballard!" But the incident was never handled by investigators as a bias crime, perhaps because the victim wasn't actually gay. The victim - who eventually recovered but suffered a number of long-term injuries as a result of the assault – eventually tired of the lack of response from police regarding his inquiries about a followup and approached the Seattle Gay News with his story, figuring that at least they would be interested in a gay-bashing assault, even if it was mistaken identity. Seattle police revisited the investigation but it had gone cold; no one was ever arrested or charged.

It's a common misconception, even within law enforcement, that the victim has to actually be who the perpetrator thinks for an assault or other offense to be a bias crime. In fact, the laws against bias crimes aren't predicated on the victim's actual status, because contrary to myth, the laws don't create "protected categories" of people. Rather, they focus on the state of mind of the perpetrator - whether a crime is motivated by an ethnic, religious, or sexual bias. That's why someone who assaults a turban-wearing Sikh for ostensibly being a Muslim terrorist is nonetheless committing a hate crime. Likewise, a gay-bashing in Ballard is still a gay-bashing, even if the victim is straight.

Crimes go unreported and uninvestigated all the time, of course, but when it happens with bias crimes, the result is especially poisonous for the larger community. Bias crimes are understood by experts to cause greater harm than ordinary crimes on three levels: the immediate victim, who typically sustains extraordinary psychological harm in addition to the extreme levels of violence that often occur in such cases; the minority community that is the larger target of the crimes, the underlying intent being to terrorize and drive them out; and the larger community, which then must wrestle with a blackened reputation and the internal animus and ethnic distrust created by the crimes.

So when police fail to respond adequately, the victim feels isolated, the target community believes it is not getting justice and can't trust authorities to provide it, and the larger community finds whatever bridges exist between ethnic communities are crumbling under the weight.

A series of incidents such as the ones described above alone might be cause for concern, but they are only anecdotal. It's more helpful, perhaps, to look at the bigger picture, to see what the numbers are in Seattle and to see how they compare to bias-crime trends nationally. When you do that, the picture that emerges is more of a mixed bag: Seattle actually does pretty well in dealing with bias crimes, though there still are problems.

A 2005 study by the Seattle LGBT Community Center looked at the 403 bias-related crime reports in the city between 2000 and 2005 and found that they occurred in every neighborhood, their numbers roughly rising and falling with general crime in those neighborhoods. Seattle had not just the largest sheer volume of bias crimes (unsurprising, since it's the largest city) but also the most enforcement, especially compared to most of the rest of Washington state. Nonetheless, the report noted that "there is a concern that the SPD data underreports the frequency of attacks that rise to the level of bias crime and malicious harassment."

1 | 2 | 3 next page

Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!

Comments:

Posted Thu, Sep 27, 8:10 p.m. Inappropriate

Questions?: Can a white, heterosexual male ever be the victim of a hate crime?? Is a white female rape victim allowed to pursue a hate crime prosecution when her attacker is non-white?? Do non-whites and homosexuals ever get charged with hate crimes??

Posted Fri, Sep 28, 10:43 a.m. Inappropriate

RE: Questions?: Of course white heterosexual males are the victims of hate crimes -- it happens with some regularity. If you check the FBI's annual statistics, you'll see that of the 9,000 or so bias crimes reported to them every year, about 1,000 of them are anti-white bias crimes (and presumably, a substantial number of those involve males).

A rape victim can pursue a bias-crime prosecution if (a) the state in which she lives includes gender as a category of bias, and (b) the evidence is clear that she was attacked because of a bias against women and an intent to terrorize them. The race of the perpetrator is a moot issue.

Non-whites are charged with bias crimes all the time (see again the FBI statistics). As for homosexuals, it's possible and even probable, though that fact is unlikely to matter in any court proceeding involving, say, a racial or ethnic bias crime. Frankly, I haven't yet encountered any crime reports involving gays bashing straights because they were straight. Have you?

You seem to labor under a fundamental misunderstanding of bias-crime laws. Once again, repeating what the article makes clear: These laws are not about the status or category of victim -- they are about the motivations of the perpetrator, and that alone.

Posted Fri, Sep 28, 4:04 p.m. Inappropriate

RE: Questions?: By the tenor of your questioning, I'm not sure my response will satisfy you nor do I desire to get into a long, protracted online discussion/argument. Nonetheless, I will try to clear up the nescience that underwrites your post. Once that occurs, you'll ideally be able to answer your questions on your own.

Hate crimes are distinguished from other violent crimes not because the latter aren't perhaps also motivated by hate. Instead, unlike other violent crime, the purpose of a hate crime is two-fold. (1) to attack the victim and (2) to intimidate and threaten the cultural group the victim is perceived to be a part of, a group that is often marginalized in some way.

So, yes, a white hetero male could be a victim if he were, say, Jewish, disabled or perceived to be gay. And, yes, non-whites and homosexuals could get charged with a hate crime if someone from either group committed one. Non-whites have gay-bashed and closeted homosexuals have gay-bashed.

The rape question I'll leave to you or others.

Posted Wed, Oct 3, 1:16 p.m. Inappropriate

RE: Questions?: Hello, Dave, I'm a regular reader of your Orcinus blog.

A rape victim can pursue a bias-crime prosecution if (a) the state in which she lives includes gender as a category of bias, and (b) the evidence is clear that she was attacked because of a bias against women and an intent to terrorize them. The race of the perpetrator is a moot issue.

I'm confused by this. Is rape necessarily a crime of gender bias? Could a perpetrator not be primarily motivated by race hatred? If the perp attacked his victim not because she was a woman, but a woman of a particular ethnic group, would that not constitute a hate crime based on ethnicity?

As you know, rape isn't about sex, but about power and violence. I can imagine a perp who would rape a victim because of her race, but would never dream of treating a woman of his own race that way.

Sorry if I'm concocting an elaborate hypothetical situation, but I was curious about your comment that race would be 'moot'.

Join Crosscut now!
Subscribe to our Newsletter

Follow Us »